Yeah I’m not totally convinced Clark will act on his words, but any investment he makes in the city during Spencer’s term (as long as subsidies are reasonable), will be well received.
- 98
And I was really frustrated with the city but that stupid decisionjivecitystl wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025I agree that the metro STL corporate community has been ABYSMAL with respect to how they perceive and invest in downtown. I agree their lack of faith and involvement in the city has been the single biggest detriment to downtown's ability to compete with suburban employment clusters. It is truly shameful.delmar2debaliviere2downtown wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025https://www.stlmag.com/business/bob-cla ... uis-mayor/
Lots of talk, let’s see some walk.
I don’t know who all makes up this group of business leaders that hate Jones or why they do. I also think it’s a lame excuse because it’s not like they supported downtown over the last two admins either, even when it became a thing in many metros to come back to investing downtown in the last 15 years, even in peer downtowns that were in worst shape than ours at the time. Our business community as a whole has been as hurtful to downtown as anything else.
Okay, Mr. Clark, let’s see that HQ move to St. Louis upon Cara winning and the rest of this group of people moving jobs downtown. Nobody wants to just hear about the city having no opportunity when you can provide it. Lots of land downtown that you’re involved in (Bottle District) that is still an urban wasteland. How about building some towers that were promised?
Will be waiting for those largest 25 companies moving some workers downtown.
That said, Bob Clark actually DID pursue investment on the northwest side of the city-- the old ammunitions campus at Goodfellow & Hwy. 70. His proposal was met with the cold shoulder from City Hall and the powers that be. That site is also still vacant because Bob Clark was told his investment wasn't welcome there. So let's just remember that when a point is made about wasted potential.
I'm just waiting for someone to give me a comprehensive, detailed argument for what they believe and they refuse to provide thatTrololzilla wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Come on man, if you're gonna go down the "fallacies" route then you've really gotta realize that the "Fallacy Fallacy" - where one dismisses arguments simply for containing fallacies - is very real.Auggie wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Again, fallacies fallacies fallacies. Nothing but fallacies!
I'm generally on your side in this debate, but you're really not arguing in good faith a lot of the time here.
- 9,564
Stuff like this won’t but telling his suncontractors to donate to Cara because he will get the lambert construction contract if she wins, could definitely be an issue for heraddxb2 wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Proof that the media will not “rip her to shreds” when Cara Spencer inevitably wins and Bob brings an investment because of it. The Bob Clark “buying” Cara Spencer story was silly. The back and forth over the north side property was silly.
“If Spencer is elected, Clark says, he and other business leaders are contemplating a significant investment in downtown St. Louis: “One idea would be to get the top, say, 25 companies, to go down and make a stand in the city in a single building.”
You mean Bob Clark level of pettiness? The guy who says he "fell out" with Jones because she didn't listen to his pitch to destroy our tourism industry for God knows how long so he could build his own entertainment district?TheWayoftheArch_V2.0 wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Never expected this level of petty from you, DB.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Mar 19, 2025I don’t know yet what type of role I’ll take over the next 4 years; be difficult or helpful. I’ve had a lot of chats with media over the last few months about this race and what comes next, should be interesting to say the least.
For the good of the city and in particular downtown, I truly hope you decide to be helpful. We need you to remain an agent of positive change.
- 977
That would be an issue if proper bidding isn’t done and/or we don’t get a good deal on the contract. If not, the narrative will be that the contract went to a company with a local presence of about 800 employees and a CEO who, at least in rhetoric, is pushing for more buy in from the local business community.dbInSouthCity wrote:Stuff like this won’t but telling his suncontractors to donate to Cara because he will get the lambert construction contract if she wins, could definitely be an issue for heraddxb2 wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Proof that the media will not “rip her to shreds” when Cara Spencer inevitably wins and Bob brings an investment because of it. The Bob Clark “buying” Cara Spencer story was silly. The back and forth over the north side property was silly.
“If Spencer is elected, Clark says, he and other business leaders are contemplating a significant investment in downtown St. Louis: “One idea would be to get the top, say, 25 companies, to go down and make a stand in the city in a single building.”
If that ends up happening, then either his company is the best for the job OR a lot of other approvers failed at doing their job. How much control do we think the Mayor has here? I’ve been led to believe by most that the mayor has very little.dbInSouthCity wrote:Stuff like this won’t but telling his suncontractors to donate to Cara because he will get the lambert construction contract if she wins, could definitely be an issue for heraddxb2 wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Proof that the media will not “rip her to shreds” when Cara Spencer inevitably wins and Bob brings an investment because of it. The Bob Clark “buying” Cara Spencer story was silly. The back and forth over the north side property was silly.
“If Spencer is elected, Clark says, he and other business leaders are contemplating a significant investment in downtown St. Louis: “One idea would be to get the top, say, 25 companies, to go down and make a stand in the city in a single building.”
Maybe I've been going at this all wrong. Maybe you only understand horrible arguments. So here goes....jivecitystl wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Correct, which is really the most poignant part of this entire debate-- 82% of STL voters did not care enough one way or the other, and the ones who did want to turn the page. A popular incumbent would have been able to turn out a lot more support if more people believed the past 4 years have been positive for the city.
18% turnout for the primary shows that the population is overwhelmingly content with the status quo as is. If they were really upset, they would have turned out in high numbers to vote out the incumbent administration. But they didn't, because they aren't. There's a loud but fringe minority who did turn out, but the overwhelming majority didn't care enough because they're happy as is.
An actually good challenger would have caused much greater turnout to oust this allegedly failed incumbent. But Cara Spencer must not be that since she only stimulated some 12% of overall voters to support her in the primary.
After all, Spencer only increased her vote total by 3,000 while Jones lost 14,000. Clearly there's more to the story than you're trying to sell.
See how I can just use your weak argument to support my own ends? It's almost like popularity is redundant in the realm of right vs wrong.
You mean the land that SLDC specifically had asked for retail proposals and Clark intentionally offered an industrial proposal that he knew would be rejected by SLDC because it wasn't retail? And how he didn't engage the other developers that the city had offered to him that had land that would have been better for his industrial proposal?jivecitystl wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025I agree that the metro STL corporate community has been ABYSMAL with respect to how they perceive and invest in downtown. I agree their lack of faith and involvement in the city has been the single biggest detriment to downtown's ability to compete with suburban employment clusters. It is truly shameful.delmar2debaliviere2downtown wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025https://www.stlmag.com/business/bob-cla ... uis-mayor/
Lots of talk, let’s see some walk.
I don’t know who all makes up this group of business leaders that hate Jones or why they do. I also think it’s a lame excuse because it’s not like they supported downtown over the last two admins either, even when it became a thing in many metros to come back to investing downtown in the last 15 years, even in peer downtowns that were in worst shape than ours at the time. Our business community as a whole has been as hurtful to downtown as anything else.
Okay, Mr. Clark, let’s see that HQ move to St. Louis upon Cara winning and the rest of this group of people moving jobs downtown. Nobody wants to just hear about the city having no opportunity when you can provide it. Lots of land downtown that you’re involved in (Bottle District) that is still an urban wasteland. How about building some towers that were promised?
Will be waiting for those largest 25 companies moving some workers downtown.
That said, Bob Clark actually DID pursue investment on the northwest side of the city-- the old ammunitions campus at Goodfellow & Hwy. 70. His proposal was met with the cold shoulder from City Hall and the powers that be. That site is also still vacant because Bob Clark was told his investment wasn't welcome there. So let's just remember that when a point is made about wasted potential.
Yea I remember reading about that. You must have just read the headline.
You don't quite grasp what buying an election is, do you?addxb2 wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Proof that the media will not “rip her to shreds” when Cara Spencer inevitably wins and Bob brings an investment because of it. The Bob Clark “buying” Cara Spencer story was silly. The back and forth over the north side property was silly.
“If Spencer is elected, Clark says, he and other business leaders are contemplating a significant investment in downtown St. Louis: “One idea would be to get the top, say, 25 companies, to go down and make a stand in the city in a single building.”
- 835
I will let your asinine logic speak for itself.Auggie wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Maybe I've been going at this all wrong. Maybe you only understand horrible arguments. So here goes....jivecitystl wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Correct, which is really the most poignant part of this entire debate-- 82% of STL voters did not care enough one way or the other, and the ones who did want to turn the page. A popular incumbent would have been able to turn out a lot more support if more people believed the past 4 years have been positive for the city.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025* majority, 82% didn’t bother voting for anyone.
18% turnout for the primary shows that the population is overwhelmingly content with the status quo as is. If they were really upset, they would have turned out in high numbers to vote out the incumbent administration. But they didn't, because they aren't. There's a loud but fringe minority who did turn out, but the overwhelming majority didn't care enough because they're happy as is.
An actually good challenger would have caused much greater turnout to oust this allegedly failed incumbent. But Cara Spencer must not be that since she only stimulated some 12% of overall voters to support her in the primary.
After all, Spencer only increased her vote total by 3,000 while Jones lost 14,000. Clearly there's more to the story than you're trying to sell.
See how I can just use your weak argument to support my own ends? It's almost like popularity is redundant in the realm of right vs wrong.
This statement makes us all dumber.18% turnout for the primary shows that the population is overwhelmingly content with the status quo as is.
SLDC had asked for retail proposals, he offered industrial. It's pretty straightforward, not that hard to understand.Baltimore Jack wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025^^bingo! I've yet to hear a logical or rational reason Clark was told to pound sand on the Goodfellow development.
I imagine the other local national player GCs like McCarthy and Alberici will be submitting airport construction bids, along with a host of other national players not from here. Wouldn't surprise me to see joint ventures from local and out of town contractors like with the NGA contract. Clayco is far from a shoe-in. Whoever snags the contract, it will be because they are the best value bid.addxb2 wrote:If that ends up happening, then either his company is the best for the job OR a lot of other approvers failed at doing their job. How much control do we think the Mayor has here? I’ve been led to believe by most that the mayor has very little.dbInSouthCity wrote: Stuff like this won’t but telling his suncontractors to donate to Cara because he will get the lambert construction contract if she wins, could definitely be an issue for her
That statement is exactly what you're been saying for weeks. Thank you for saying your own argument is dumb.jivecitystl wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025I will let your asinine logic speak for itself.Auggie wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Maybe I've been going at this all wrong. Maybe you only understand horrible arguments. So here goes....jivecitystl wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Correct, which is really the most poignant part of this entire debate-- 82% of STL voters did not care enough one way or the other, and the ones who did want to turn the page. A popular incumbent would have been able to turn out a lot more support if more people believed the past 4 years have been positive for the city.
18% turnout for the primary shows that the population is overwhelmingly content with the status quo as is. If they were really upset, they would have turned out in high numbers to vote out the incumbent administration. But they didn't, because they aren't. There's a loud but fringe minority who did turn out, but the overwhelming majority didn't care enough because they're happy as is.
An actually good challenger would have caused much greater turnout to oust this allegedly failed incumbent. But Cara Spencer must not be that since she only stimulated some 12% of overall voters to support her in the primary.
After all, Spencer only increased her vote total by 3,000 while Jones lost 14,000. Clearly there's more to the story than you're trying to sell.
See how I can just use your weak argument to support my own ends? It's almost like popularity is redundant in the realm of right vs wrong.This statement makes us all dumber.18% turnout for the primary shows that the population is overwhelmingly content with the status quo as is.
- 835
Clark's plan included retail. I thought you're the one who cares so much about facts. Here's another fact-- there is NO OTHER PROPOSAL for the site, none. Way to promote investment in low-investment neighborhoods! Are the folks on TJ's side proud of this accomplishment?
Here is what “blocking/ignoring” looks like. Just in case anyone is curious.
![]()
- 9,564
It didn’t include retail nor was it a serious proposal, it was written and structured just to get rejected to score political points. City could have not accepted less than fair market value on the land and Clark’s “proposal” less than half of that.jivecitystl wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Clark's plan included retail. I thought you're the one who cares so much about facts. Here's another fact-- there is NO OTHER PROPOSAL for the site, none. Way to promote investment in low-investment neighborhoods! Are the folks on TJ's side proud of this accomplishment?
Btw, in the podcast version Bob talks about me for some reason, so my response to that
- 835
Got it. Could the RFP be flawed then? Why haven't other developers lined up with feasible proposals that fit the bill? Maybe it's not realistic? Nevertheless, that site had a proposal on the table from a credible developer and he was told "no thanks" and was sent walking. The site in question is still sitting vacant with absolutely NOTHING on the horizon at this point. Whether Clayco's proposal was serious or not is an open question that we won't ever have an answer to because it wasn't given the time of day and there's no way to know what could have come of that plan had the city been more open to refining the project rather than slamming the door in its face. But at least we still have a vacant lot to be proud of.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025It didn’t include retail nor was it a serious proposal, it was written and structured just to get rejected to score political points. City could have not accepted less than fair market value on the land and Clark’s “proposal” less than half of that.jivecitystl wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Clark's plan included retail. I thought you're the one who cares so much about facts. Here's another fact-- there is NO OTHER PROPOSAL for the site, none. Way to promote investment in low-investment neighborhoods! Are the folks on TJ's side proud of this accomplishment?
- 9,564
I think what the City was looking for at that location is/was unrealistic and on the other hand, if Bob was serious about building whatever he was proposing, there are dozens of more suitable sites on other side of 70 from that site. You’re not going to get retail there tomorrow or in 5 years but it doesn’t mean you put an industrial business there either. I understand we are desperate for all and any development but sometimes it’s not a bad thing to say no to a incomparable usejivecitystl wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Got it. Could the RFP be flawed then? Why haven't other developers lined up with feasible proposals that fit the bill? Maybe it's not realistic? Nevertheless, that site had a proposal on the table from a credible developer and he was told "no thanks" and was sent walking. The site in question is still sitting vacant with absolutely NOTHING on the horizon at this point. Whether Clayco's proposal was serious or not is an open question that we won't ever have an answer to because it wasn't given the time of day and there's no way to know what could have come of that plan had the city been more open to refining the project rather than slamming the door in its face. But at least we still have a vacant lot to be proud of.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025It didn’t include retail nor was it a serious proposal, it was written and structured just to get rejected to score political points. City could have not accepted less than fair market value on the land and Clark’s “proposal” less than half of that.jivecitystl wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Clark's plan included retail. I thought you're the one who cares so much about facts. Here's another fact-- there is NO OTHER PROPOSAL for the site, none. Way to promote investment in low-investment neighborhoods! Are the folks on TJ's side proud of this accomplishment?
I’m listening currently, about half way through.
He’s leaning on a few of the “suburbanisms” that I hate, but he’s generally giving the right sentiment. Leadership under Jones is uninspiring.
He’s leaning on a few of the “suburbanisms” that I hate, but he’s generally giving the right sentiment. Leadership under Jones is uninspiring.
! FALLACYaddxb2 wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025Here is what “blocking/ignoring” looks like. Just in case anyone is curious.
For good measure and in the spirit of the thing today.
- 9,564
addxb2 wrote: ↑Mar 20, 2025I’m listening currently, about half way through.
He’s leaning on a few of the “suburbanisms” that I hate, but he’s generally giving the right sentiment. Leadership under Jones is uninspiring.
Well, I like the idea. Sorry.
I have a friend in tourism and event management in a peer city. They’re originally from Jefferson County. They’ve heard their leaders say regarding St. Louis, “always nice to see a place take a shot and miss”. You’re going to respond with data on bookings and blah blah blah, but the outside consensus is that Katy and unimaginative leaders blew STLs shot at being more than “reasonable competition”.
I have a friend in tourism and event management in a peer city. They’re originally from Jefferson County. They’ve heard their leaders say regarding St. Louis, “always nice to see a place take a shot and miss”. You’re going to respond with data on bookings and blah blah blah, but the outside consensus is that Katy and unimaginative leaders blew STLs shot at being more than “reasonable competition”.
- 1,797
^Who is Katy?
Jones was right about the political will for Clark’s vision for the convention center. The county bungled its mere $100 million contribution. But they would have efficiently appropriated 4X that number for Clark’s proposal? Gtfoh
Jones was right about the political will for Clark’s vision for the convention center. The county bungled its mere $100 million contribution. But they would have efficiently appropriated 4X that number for Clark’s proposal? Gtfoh