It would take a charter amendment.
- 732
Thanks for the reasoned responses. And yes, to be objective and fair (I wish more could be that way) it totally sucks that we have to go through Jeff City for that change.
So you agree, republicans are terrible at governing.whitherSTL wrote:Thanks for the reasoned responses. And yes, to be objective and fair (I wish more could be that way) it totally sucks that we have to go through Jeff City for that change.
It’s a joke. Chill. My honest answer is that “whoops” is fine. Even though I’m not sure she is personally responsible for either of those things. Every mayor has had “whoops”.
True, but to be fair, even when Jeff City run by Democrats not that long ago, it still wasn't doing sh*t to help the City.*addxb2 wrote: ↑Jan 07, 2025So you agree, republicans are terrible at governing.whitherSTL wrote:Thanks for the reasoned responses. And yes, to be objective and fair (I wish more could be that way) it totally sucks that we have to go through Jeff City for that change.
*With the possible exception of the historic preservation tax credit regime--although that may have been a R governor with a D legislature now that I'm thinking about it. MO was the purplest of swing states for a very long time before the loonies took over the asylum.
Btw, I really like Cara. Always have. She’s a rocker for STL.
Spencer vs. Krewson, easy.
Spencer vs. Slay, easy.
Spencer vs. Reed, easy.
Spencer vs. 2017 Jones, easy.
Spencer vs. 2025 Jones, not easy. Jones has done perfectly well. This is coming from a Chicagoan who has put up with Lightfoot and Johnson. Trust me, it could be a lot worse.
Spencer vs. Krewson, easy.
Spencer vs. Slay, easy.
Spencer vs. Reed, easy.
Spencer vs. 2017 Jones, easy.
Spencer vs. 2025 Jones, not easy. Jones has done perfectly well. This is coming from a Chicagoan who has put up with Lightfoot and Johnson. Trust me, it could be a lot worse.
- 1,607
A charter amendment is done on a city wide vote. Not a constitutional amendment at the state level.whitherSTL wrote: ↑Jan 07, 2025Thanks for the reasoned responses. And yes, to be objective and fair (I wish more could be that way) it totally sucks that we have to go through Jeff City for that change.
Your almost as big a dumb azz as the idiots who didn't tax weed sales and get interest.
And let me also say, I agree that those are egregious oversights from all of city hall - mayor, comptroller, BoA, and FX Daly.
Looking forward to which of your voices responds.
Looking forward to which of your voices responds.
- 975
In terms of the article from the BJ, I certainly acknowledge some aspects of the criticism of Jones is driven racism and often comes from outside the city (looking at one troll on this forum in particular).
As a Jones voter and city resident, here is my takeaway:
The nature of her travel as mayor is a legitimate premise to report on:
1) Its undeniable she’s spent substantially more time outside of the city than her predecessors.
2) There have been plenty of stories of other politicians abusing time and tax payer money for boondoggle travel. It’s a concern amongst voters.
3) Tishaura’s travel as Treasurer on the tax payer’s dime was a point of discussion amongst voters during her last campaign.
4) Tishaura made it a point during her campaign that she would be a better ambassador for the city and that would include travel.
I think the article presents a pretty fair and nuanced assessment her travel with the above in mind.
It’s made clear that tax payers aren’t on the hook for hardly any of her current travel. She’s found other ways to pay for it. Credit to Tishaura.
The article points out how she is able to better handle her day job back home while traveling due to modern tech. Credit to Tishaura.
The article points out examples where her travel may have had a tangible benefit for the city, such as her trip to the ICSC event and influencing the Target at Midtown. Credit to Tishaura.
On the other hand, I think criticism is fair regarding the following:
Transparency. Not giving her contacts back home (like Vollmer) visibility when she travels is an opportunity. It would be better for her to ensure she has appropriate coverage when she’s gone and can appropriately delagate.
It is true that we are still lacking in many areas that a “city manager” type of role would typically handle. Some of her travel doesn’t have too much of a tangible return, so I understand the criticism of non critical travel in light of those issues. I’d encourage Tishaura to more proactively and transparently speak to citizens about the reasons for her travel and the return on that time spent. She doesn’t often do that.
All in all I thought the article was helpful in terms of better informing a voter on the nuances of one aspect of Tishaura’s day to day as Mayor. She’s got opportunities for improvement and she’s still got my vote.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As a Jones voter and city resident, here is my takeaway:
The nature of her travel as mayor is a legitimate premise to report on:
1) Its undeniable she’s spent substantially more time outside of the city than her predecessors.
2) There have been plenty of stories of other politicians abusing time and tax payer money for boondoggle travel. It’s a concern amongst voters.
3) Tishaura’s travel as Treasurer on the tax payer’s dime was a point of discussion amongst voters during her last campaign.
4) Tishaura made it a point during her campaign that she would be a better ambassador for the city and that would include travel.
I think the article presents a pretty fair and nuanced assessment her travel with the above in mind.
It’s made clear that tax payers aren’t on the hook for hardly any of her current travel. She’s found other ways to pay for it. Credit to Tishaura.
The article points out how she is able to better handle her day job back home while traveling due to modern tech. Credit to Tishaura.
The article points out examples where her travel may have had a tangible benefit for the city, such as her trip to the ICSC event and influencing the Target at Midtown. Credit to Tishaura.
On the other hand, I think criticism is fair regarding the following:
Transparency. Not giving her contacts back home (like Vollmer) visibility when she travels is an opportunity. It would be better for her to ensure she has appropriate coverage when she’s gone and can appropriately delagate.
It is true that we are still lacking in many areas that a “city manager” type of role would typically handle. Some of her travel doesn’t have too much of a tangible return, so I understand the criticism of non critical travel in light of those issues. I’d encourage Tishaura to more proactively and transparently speak to citizens about the reasons for her travel and the return on that time spent. She doesn’t often do that.
All in all I thought the article was helpful in terms of better informing a voter on the nuances of one aspect of Tishaura’s day to day as Mayor. She’s got opportunities for improvement and she’s still got my vote.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 9,529
^ small thing on #1 above: previous mayors not travel is not the baseline or standard. I think that’s more of a critic of their poor performance by not meeting with peers and other officials to learn. Now I don’t blame Krewson as much because in her 4th month the Stockley protests happened and than covid took up her last 16 months in office. But slay had 16 years
Knock it off. You can discuss the issues without childish personal attacks.whitherSTL wrote: ↑Jan 07, 2025That’s what I thought. You can’t answer the questions about Jones’ administration’s ineptitude.
Your playbook is stale. Just like your sex life.
- 975
Totally agree. I don’t think previous Mayors should be the baseline. There has to be some degree of ambassadorship from our Mayor.dbInSouthCity wrote:^ small thing on #1 above: previous mayors not travel is not the baseline or standard. I think that’s more of a critic of their poor performance by not meeting with peers and other officials to learn. Now I don’t blame Krewson as much because in her 4th month the Stockley protests happened and than covid took up her last 16 months in office. But slay had 16 years
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You can also discuss the issues without personal attacks, or not at all.TheWayoftheArch_V2.0 wrote: ↑Jan 07, 2025A charter amendment is done on a city wide vote. Not a constitutional amendment at the state level.whitherSTL wrote: ↑Jan 07, 2025Thanks for the reasoned responses. And yes, to be objective and fair (I wish more could be that way) it totally sucks that we have to go through Jeff City for that change.
Your almost as big a dumb azz as the idiots who didn't tax weed sales and get interest.
- 1,607
Sorry dad, he said it to me first.
- 502
Tishaura has grown on me just a little bit since 2021. Mostly because she's been consistent, which brings a level of stability to the table. You know what to expect with little surprise.
I do think a weak area for her is occasionally playing the "mean girl" thing on social media. Though no where near as bad as her father, I think it's troublesome when a politician decides to block and respond sarcastically/rudely to people scrutinizing her. Trump is notoriously bad at this, Tishaura really shouldn't waste her time on stuff like that. Leave it to Virvus to do the tweeting and let Tishaura do her job as Mayor.
Because I don't live in St. Louis anymore, it's difficult to gauge a question that I present my friends who live in the City (and aren't terminally online) - do you feel the City has gotten better over the past 4 years or not? They're split on it. They feel the City has gotten safer, but the loss of some of their favorite businesses, seeing their neighbors move out, and basic City services not being delivered in a timely manner makes them fall in the "it's not better, but it's not worse" category.
My observation is that the City has "leveled out". The net gains/losses balance out, so it's a good opportunity to grow from here.
Regardless of who becomes Mayor in a few months (it's either Jones or Spencer), she needs to be ready to be the Mayor to successfully "market" St. Louis as the population bottoms out and begins to recover. The Board of Aldermen needs to be unified on this as well. Celebrate the wins, like reduced homicides, and work hard on areas where major improvements are needed. When the first population estimate is posted showing population growing again, celebrate it. Every elected official needs to actively work together to market the City, all that's good with it, and highlight the good changes that are being made.
Basically, just have elected officials all on board with being persistent optimists who are unafraid to acknowledge that times can be tough, but positive change is on the way. The media can say what they want, but also remember that the media has become more fine-tuned to address a rowdy minority crowd.
I do think a weak area for her is occasionally playing the "mean girl" thing on social media. Though no where near as bad as her father, I think it's troublesome when a politician decides to block and respond sarcastically/rudely to people scrutinizing her. Trump is notoriously bad at this, Tishaura really shouldn't waste her time on stuff like that. Leave it to Virvus to do the tweeting and let Tishaura do her job as Mayor.
Because I don't live in St. Louis anymore, it's difficult to gauge a question that I present my friends who live in the City (and aren't terminally online) - do you feel the City has gotten better over the past 4 years or not? They're split on it. They feel the City has gotten safer, but the loss of some of their favorite businesses, seeing their neighbors move out, and basic City services not being delivered in a timely manner makes them fall in the "it's not better, but it's not worse" category.
My observation is that the City has "leveled out". The net gains/losses balance out, so it's a good opportunity to grow from here.
Regardless of who becomes Mayor in a few months (it's either Jones or Spencer), she needs to be ready to be the Mayor to successfully "market" St. Louis as the population bottoms out and begins to recover. The Board of Aldermen needs to be unified on this as well. Celebrate the wins, like reduced homicides, and work hard on areas where major improvements are needed. When the first population estimate is posted showing population growing again, celebrate it. Every elected official needs to actively work together to market the City, all that's good with it, and highlight the good changes that are being made.
Basically, just have elected officials all on board with being persistent optimists who are unafraid to acknowledge that times can be tough, but positive change is on the way. The media can say what they want, but also remember that the media has become more fine-tuned to address a rowdy minority crowd.
I am a proud City resident. With that being said certain services have gotten notably worse the last couple of years. Trash service is inconsistent. I have a rollout that should be picked up weekly. It oftentimes takes 2 weeks or longer. So I haul household trash to my job site dumpsters. The one time I called 911 nobody answered. It took 6 months for me to get a permit for an apartment project in the City. Plan review used to be staffed with 5 plus people. For the last year we have had one person reviewing all permit applications. Basic services should not be so inconsistent and business should not be so hard to conduct. In spite of these types of things, people enjoy and want to be / live in the city.
- 740
To me that's the biggest issue that the reelect Jones crowd on here tunes out. I'm glad crime is down but considering it's down nationwide I can't credit this administration too much for that. But city services can definitely be laid at the feet of the one currently in charge. The buck stops here.STLAPTS wrote: ↑Jan 07, 2025I am a proud City resident. With that being said certain services have gotten notably worse the last couple of years. Trash service is inconsistent. I have a rollout that should be picked up weekly. It oftentimes takes 2 weeks or longer. So I haul household trash to my job site dumpsters. The one time I called 911 nobody answered. It took 6 months for me to get a permit for an apartment project in the City. Plan review used to be staffed with 5 plus people. For the last year we have had one person reviewing all permit applications. Basic services should not be so inconsistent and business should not be so hard to conduct. In spite of these types of things, people enjoy and want to be / live in the city.
- 9,529
^ having worked for the city on 2 occasions, including one zoning set next to the 5 plan examiners, all who were very old guys when I was there 2011-2013, it’s a bit hard to blame current admin for decades of not strengthening the bench. Good luck in 2025 getting PE or licensed architects to take a $45,000-50,000 starting pay.
Trash pick up has been a long standing issue and the admin inherited it and made it better, it’s not perfect but they now consistently pick up 90-95% of routes on time. Trash pick up has been a such long standing issue that it was free for as long as I’ve lived here and than it become $11 a month and now $14, that wasn’t done because it was a smooth operation pre jones admin.
Admin also inherited a bad 911 system and all it did was work to increase pay and fully staff it, and since last July it’s been steadily improving response time and now is meeting national standards and it secured state funding for a new joint 911 ops center that last 3 admins talked about
Trash pick up has been a long standing issue and the admin inherited it and made it better, it’s not perfect but they now consistently pick up 90-95% of routes on time. Trash pick up has been a such long standing issue that it was free for as long as I’ve lived here and than it become $11 a month and now $14, that wasn’t done because it was a smooth operation pre jones admin.
Admin also inherited a bad 911 system and all it did was work to increase pay and fully staff it, and since last July it’s been steadily improving response time and now is meeting national standards and it secured state funding for a new joint 911 ops center that last 3 admins talked about
Democrats haven't controlled the legislature this century. Pretty sure it hasn't been since the 1990s that they've actually run this state.SB in BH wrote: ↑Jan 07, 2025True, but to be fair, even when Jeff City run by Democrats not that long ago, it still wasn't doing sh*t to help the City.*addxb2 wrote: ↑Jan 07, 2025So you agree, republicans are terrible at governing.whitherSTL wrote:Thanks for the reasoned responses. And yes, to be objective and fair (I wish more could be that way) it totally sucks that we have to go through Jeff City for that change.
*With the possible exception of the historic preservation tax credit regime--although that may have been a R governor with a D legislature now that I'm thinking about it. MO was the purplest of swing states for a very long time before the loonies took over the asylum.
Real GDP Growth:Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Jan 07, 2025Tishaura has grown on me just a little bit since 2021. Mostly because she's been consistent, which brings a level of stability to the table. You know what to expect with little surprise.
I do think a weak area for her is occasionally playing the "mean girl" thing on social media. Though no where near as bad as her father, I think it's troublesome when a politician decides to block and respond sarcastically/rudely to people scrutinizing her. Trump is notoriously bad at this, Tishaura really shouldn't waste her time on stuff like that. Leave it to Virvus to do the tweeting and let Tishaura do her job as Mayor.
Because I don't live in St. Louis anymore, it's difficult to gauge a question that I present my friends who live in the City (and aren't terminally online) - do you feel the City has gotten better over the past 4 years or not? They're split on it. They feel the City has gotten safer, but the loss of some of their favorite businesses, seeing their neighbors move out, and basic City services not being delivered in a timely manner makes them fall in the "it's not better, but it's not worse" category.
My observation is that the City has "leveled out". The net gains/losses balance out, so it's a good opportunity to grow from here.
Regardless of who becomes Mayor in a few months (it's either Jones or Spencer), she needs to be ready to be the Mayor to successfully "market" St. Louis as the population bottoms out and begins to recover. The Board of Aldermen needs to be unified on this as well. Celebrate the wins, like reduced homicides, and work hard on areas where major improvements are needed. When the first population estimate is posted showing population growing again, celebrate it. Every elected official needs to actively work together to market the City, all that's good with it, and highlight the good changes that are being made.
Basically, just have elected officials all on board with being persistent optimists who are unafraid to acknowledge that times can be tough, but positive change is on the way. The media can say what they want, but also remember that the media has become more fine-tuned to address a rowdy minority crowd.
Slay: -11.3%
Krewson: 1.2%
Jones: 2.8%
- 1,793
Dude, “Mayor Takes 64 Trips in 42 Months” ran as the BREAKING NEWS ticker at the top of the BJ’s webpage all day. It was intended as an attack add from the Mayor’s opponents that pay the BJ.Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑Jan 07, 2025In terms of the article from the BJ, I certainly acknowledge some aspects of the criticism of Jones is driven racism and often comes from outside the city (looking at one troll on this forum in particular).
As a Jones voter and city resident, here is my takeaway:
The nature of her travel as mayor is a legitimate premise to report on:
1) Its undeniable she’s spent substantially more time outside of the city than her predecessors.
2) There have been plenty of stories of other politicians abusing time and tax payer money for boondoggle travel. It’s a concern amongst voters.
3) Tishaura’s travel as Treasurer on the tax payer’s dime was a point of discussion amongst voters during her last campaign.
4) Tishaura made it a point during her campaign that she would be a better ambassador for the city and that would include travel.
I think the article presents a pretty fair and nuanced assessment her travel with the above in mind.
It’s made clear that tax payers aren’t on the hook for hardly any of her current travel. She’s found other ways to pay for it. Credit to Tishaura.
The article points out how she is able to better handle her day job back home while traveling due to modern tech. Credit to Tishaura.
The article points out examples where her travel may have had a tangible benefit for the city, such as her trip to the ICSC event and influencing the Target at Midtown. Credit to Tishaura.
On the other hand, I think criticism is fair regarding the following:
Transparency. Not giving her contacts back home (like Vollmer) visibility when she travels is an opportunity. It would be better for her to ensure she has appropriate coverage when she’s gone and can appropriately delagate.
It is true that we are still lacking in many areas that a “city manager” type of role would typically handle. Some of her travel doesn’t have too much of a tangible return, so I understand the criticism of non critical travel in light of those issues. I’d encourage Tishaura to more proactively and transparently speak to citizens about the reasons for her travel and the return on that time spent. She doesn’t often do that.
All in all I thought the article was helpful in terms of better informing a voter on the nuances of one aspect of Tishaura’s day to day as Mayor. She’s got opportunities for improvement and she’s still got my vote.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This was not a legitimate news article. A frequent issue with the Business Journal and Downtown Crime Monitor
- 975
You’re obsessed with the headline, which offers no opinion on whether the level of travel was appropriate or not.JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Dude, “Mayor Takes 64 Trips in 42 Months” ran as the BREAKING NEWS ticker at the top of the BJ’s webpage all day. It was intended as an attack add from the Mayor’s opponents that pay the BJ.Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑Jan 07, 2025In terms of the article from the BJ, I certainly acknowledge some aspects of the criticism of Jones is driven racism and often comes from outside the city (looking at one troll on this forum in particular).
As a Jones voter and city resident, here is my takeaway:
The nature of her travel as mayor is a legitimate premise to report on:
1) Its undeniable she’s spent substantially more time outside of the city than her predecessors.
2) There have been plenty of stories of other politicians abusing time and tax payer money for boondoggle travel. It’s a concern amongst voters.
3) Tishaura’s travel as Treasurer on the tax payer’s dime was a point of discussion amongst voters during her last campaign.
4) Tishaura made it a point during her campaign that she would be a better ambassador for the city and that would include travel.
I think the article presents a pretty fair and nuanced assessment her travel with the above in mind.
It’s made clear that tax payers aren’t on the hook for hardly any of her current travel. She’s found other ways to pay for it. Credit to Tishaura.
The article points out how she is able to better handle her day job back home while traveling due to modern tech. Credit to Tishaura.
The article points out examples where her travel may have had a tangible benefit for the city, such as her trip to the ICSC event and influencing the Target at Midtown. Credit to Tishaura.
On the other hand, I think criticism is fair regarding the following:
Transparency. Not giving her contacts back home (like Vollmer) visibility when she travels is an opportunity. It would be better for her to ensure she has appropriate coverage when she’s gone and can appropriately delagate.
It is true that we are still lacking in many areas that a “city manager” type of role would typically handle. Some of her travel doesn’t have too much of a tangible return, so I understand the criticism of non critical travel in light of those issues. I’d encourage Tishaura to more proactively and transparently speak to citizens about the reasons for her travel and the return on that time spent. She doesn’t often do that.
All in all I thought the article was helpful in terms of better informing a voter on the nuances of one aspect of Tishaura’s day to day as Mayor. She’s got opportunities for improvement and she’s still got my vote.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This was not a legitimate news article. A frequent issue with the Business Journal and Downtown Crime Monitor
You’re completely unwilling to acknowledge the nuance I laid out in the article as well.
Do you have any evidence that Tishaura’s opponents pay the Business Journal and were able to influence this publication?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 9,529
I bet i can figure that out....Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑Jan 08, 2025JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Dude, “Mayor Takes 64 Trips in 42 Months” ran as the BREAKING NEWS ticker at the top of the BJ’s webpage all day. It was intended as an attack add from the Mayor’s opponents that pay the BJ.Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑Jan 07, 2025In terms of the article from the BJ, I certainly acknowledge some aspects of the criticism of Jones is driven racism and often comes from outside the city (looking at one troll on this forum in particular).
As a Jones voter and city resident, here is my takeaway:
The nature of her travel as mayor is a legitimate premise to report on:
1) Its undeniable she’s spent substantially more time outside of the city than her predecessors.
2) There have been plenty of stories of other politicians abusing time and tax payer money for boondoggle travel. It’s a concern amongst voters.
3) Tishaura’s travel as Treasurer on the tax payer’s dime was a point of discussion amongst voters during her last campaign.
4) Tishaura made it a point during her campaign that she would be a better ambassador for the city and that would include travel.
I think the article presents a pretty fair and nuanced assessment her travel with the above in mind.
It’s made clear that tax payers aren’t on the hook for hardly any of her current travel. She’s found other ways to pay for it. Credit to Tishaura.
The article points out how she is able to better handle her day job back home while traveling due to modern tech. Credit to Tishaura.
The article points out examples where her travel may have had a tangible benefit for the city, such as her trip to the ICSC event and influencing the Target at Midtown. Credit to Tishaura.
On the other hand, I think criticism is fair regarding the following:
Transparency. Not giving her contacts back home (like Vollmer) visibility when she travels is an opportunity. It would be better for her to ensure she has appropriate coverage when she’s gone and can appropriately delagate.
It is true that we are still lacking in many areas that a “city manager” type of role would typically handle. Some of her travel doesn’t have too much of a tangible return, so I understand the criticism of non critical travel in light of those issues. I’d encourage Tishaura to more proactively and transparently speak to citizens about the reasons for her travel and the return on that time spent. She doesn’t often do that.
All in all I thought the article was helpful in terms of better informing a voter on the nuances of one aspect of Tishaura’s day to day as Mayor. She’s got opportunities for improvement and she’s still got my vote.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This was not a legitimate news article. A frequent issue with the Business Journal and Downtown Crime Monitor
Do you have any evidence that Tishaura’s opponents pay the Business Journal and were able to influence this publication?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There are a lot of issues and questionable things in this 10,000 word spread and one example is bunch of attempts by the author and an assortment of people, some of whom have been out of the mayor's office or city government for 10+ years to vaguely connect the travel to the various issues the city is facing or comments that other mayors probably don't travel as much, without any substantiation. There is also an implication that Jones is overstating the benefits to the city resulting from the travel by pointing out that certain agencies didn't explicitly say her meeting with them played a role in awards of grants or that original awards of grants. This completely ignores the practical reality that establishing and maintaining relationships or having an opportunity to "plead your case" outside of what is in a grant application, often plays a significant role, and no agency is going to admit that on the record.
Another example is how the article mentions that she traveled significantly more than her predecessors, specifically Krewson, Slay, and Bosley. Bosley was mayor from 1993–1997 and Slay from 2001–2017. Bosley mentions in the article that he didn't travel much because he didn't want to spend too much time out of the city. That makes perfect sense considering the ability to stay meaningfully connected while away in the 1990s was practically non-existent, and the same could be said for the majority of Slay's term. During the latter half of Slay's term and Krewson's term (2017–2021), they may have had an ability to work remotely, but it wasn't nearly as common as it is now, and who knows if the city even had the capabilities for it, considering how the federal government and many companies and firms did not have fully built-out remote capabilities until the pandemic.
The article doesn't include any context about those mayors’ ability to productively work remotely, which makes those comparisons unhelpful, other than as support for the implicit narrative woven throughout that the amount of travel is weird/excessive/unnecessary. It would have been more useful and would have helped to better contextualize her travel if her travel was compared to that of the Kansas City mayor or another mayor of a similar city, like Baltimore or Minneapolis, during this same post-2020 timeframe.
These types of articles with clickbait headlines that either lack a genuine effort to place events or issues in a useful context and/or are driven by the ideology of the author or the publication don't do anything to further a substantive critique and instead just give bad faith actors and/or opponents a one-liner to criticize her with that becomes a part of the public consciousness whether it is accurate or not.
Good investigative journalism is incredibly important to empower citizens to assess the performance of elected officials and hold them accountable. STLPR, Ryan Krull/Sarah Fenske at STL Magazine, and other former RFT journalists do a great job of producing journalism that informs and is conducive to productive discourse and assessments of an official's performance/record. This piece by the managing editor just isn't that and if the managing editor is producing this clearly agenda driven piece, there is little faith in anything the subordinates produce in relation to Mayor Jones and City Gov.
Another example is how the article mentions that she traveled significantly more than her predecessors, specifically Krewson, Slay, and Bosley. Bosley was mayor from 1993–1997 and Slay from 2001–2017. Bosley mentions in the article that he didn't travel much because he didn't want to spend too much time out of the city. That makes perfect sense considering the ability to stay meaningfully connected while away in the 1990s was practically non-existent, and the same could be said for the majority of Slay's term. During the latter half of Slay's term and Krewson's term (2017–2021), they may have had an ability to work remotely, but it wasn't nearly as common as it is now, and who knows if the city even had the capabilities for it, considering how the federal government and many companies and firms did not have fully built-out remote capabilities until the pandemic.
The article doesn't include any context about those mayors’ ability to productively work remotely, which makes those comparisons unhelpful, other than as support for the implicit narrative woven throughout that the amount of travel is weird/excessive/unnecessary. It would have been more useful and would have helped to better contextualize her travel if her travel was compared to that of the Kansas City mayor or another mayor of a similar city, like Baltimore or Minneapolis, during this same post-2020 timeframe.
These types of articles with clickbait headlines that either lack a genuine effort to place events or issues in a useful context and/or are driven by the ideology of the author or the publication don't do anything to further a substantive critique and instead just give bad faith actors and/or opponents a one-liner to criticize her with that becomes a part of the public consciousness whether it is accurate or not.
Good investigative journalism is incredibly important to empower citizens to assess the performance of elected officials and hold them accountable. STLPR, Ryan Krull/Sarah Fenske at STL Magazine, and other former RFT journalists do a great job of producing journalism that informs and is conducive to productive discourse and assessments of an official's performance/record. This piece by the managing editor just isn't that and if the managing editor is producing this clearly agenda driven piece, there is little faith in anything the subordinates produce in relation to Mayor Jones and City Gov.
- 3,762
DB, have you received any compensation from the Jones campaign during this campaign cycle? I believe you have in the past, no? Fine if you are, but cards on the table would be appreciated.