urbanSTL

The good news is, we don't have to speculate anymore.

She's on the clock now, and we'll get to Monday morning quarterback this again in 4 years.

I'm not a resident, but have worked downtown for virtually my entire career.  I think Jones did well and I hope Spencer continues the trend.

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

This thread has been embarrassingly low I.Q. back and forth by the usual suspects. Can we please end it now and get back to urbanism discussion?

We just removed the most urbanist mayor this city has ever had in the modern era and elected one who uses the term "boondoggle" to describe MetroLink expansion. Lmao.

I can almost guarantee that Spencer’s walking/biking/transit mileage is 100x that of Jones.

I was in transportation planning in STL in 2017. It was an open secret that TJ shared disdain for cyclists and bike infrastructure. She hired an ex-Trailnet staffer who promptly got her on MetroLink for a photo-op and gave her a list of buzzwords about bike/ped safety.

“But…but all the new bike lanes being built” almost all of them advocated by private/quasi-private or non-profit organizations for years. All would’ve been built under Krewson/Slay/Spencer with a one-time gift from the feds.

On urbanism? Spencer > Jones by 10,000 miles.

Your case would be stronger if Slay did anything like your claim he "would have done" when he was the mayor for 16 years.

And dude, I'm a bicyclist and I have a distain for other cyclists because they often blatantly violate every traffic law they can.

But I'm sure the "boondoggle" person is gonna be great for urbanism. You're probably right.

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

My final take in this thread. This is a triumphant culmination of one woman’s 20 year run from private citizen, to community leader, to alder, and now Mayor. No connections other than the ones she made herself along the way. A success story for those who dream of leading. I’m very optimistic for St. Louis, maybe more than I ever have been.

Very well put.

And if DB is correct that she was imbibing a little more than usual why not in light of what she  has accomplished as a woman and single mom with no family dynasty to rely on.

I do  want to apologize for my comment to DB.

It just reeked of misogyny to claim that a woman showing jubilation at her astounding victory must be "sloshed"

I always hated the hair and nails comments directed at Tishaura Jones too.

Just replying what a reporter at the scene texted me.  

There is nothing wrong with putting down a few cold ones when you get elected to the highest office in the city.

All that is yesterday’s news, the Spencer admin starts now with the most important week of her administration, that is announcing who is going to do the actual work as department directors. Mistakes during this week in hiring those, sets a table for a rough start especially because of federal climate right now, the markets (look at the bond market; if this sticks I think it kills 75% of announced projects) Good times ahead

Auggie wrote:

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

Auggie wrote:
We just removed the most urbanist mayor this city has ever had in the modern era and elected one who uses the term "boondoggle" to describe MetroLink expansion. Lmao.

I can almost guarantee that Spencer’s walking/biking/transit mileage is 100x that of Jones.

I was in transportation planning in STL in 2017. It was an open secret that TJ shared disdain for cyclists and bike infrastructure. She hired an ex-Trailnet staffer who promptly got her on MetroLink for a photo-op and gave her a list of buzzwords about bike/ped safety.

“But…but all the new bike lanes being built” almost all of them advocated by private/quasi-private or non-profit organizations for years. All would’ve been built under Krewson/Slay/Spencer with a one-time gift from the feds.

On urbanism? Spencer > Jones by 10,000 miles.

Your case would be stronger if Slay did anything like your claim he "would have done" when he was the mayor for 16 years.

And dude, I'm a bicyclist and I have a distain for other cyclists because they often blatantly violate every traffic law they can.

But I'm sure the "boondoggle" person is gonna be great for urbanism. You're probably right.

You act as if she said “public transportation is a boondoggle”. It is completely fair for someone to see the 2025 versus the 2017 project (including price tag) and think “Are we sure this isn’t a boondoggle?” In a region skating on thin ice with the FTA thanks to the trolley boondoggle especially. Even more so considering the federal landscape is upside down for at least 2 years.

2017 had a connection to Downtown, Old North, and Hyde Park. It had more stops in the densest part of the city. It had more connection to the existing bus and MetroLink system. It was 30% cheaper but went 30% further.

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

Got to give Cara credit for doing her victory speech completely sloshed.

Old school St. Louis!  

Auggie wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

Auggie wrote:
We just removed the most urbanist mayor this city has ever had in the modern era and elected one who uses the term "boondoggle" to describe MetroLink expansion. Lmao.

I can almost guarantee that Spencer’s walking/biking/transit mileage is 100x that of Jones.

I was in transportation planning in STL in 2017. It was an open secret that TJ shared disdain for cyclists and bike infrastructure. She hired an ex-Trailnet staffer who promptly got her on MetroLink for a photo-op and gave her a list of buzzwords about bike/ped safety.

“But…but all the new bike lanes being built” almost all of them advocated by private/quasi-private or non-profit organizations for years. All would’ve been built under Krewson/Slay/Spencer with a one-time gift from the feds.

On urbanism? Spencer > Jones by 10,000 miles.

Your case would be stronger if Slay did anything like your claim he "would have done" when he was the mayor for 16 years.

And dude, I'm a bicyclist and I have a distain for other cyclists because they often blatantly violate every traffic law they can.

But I'm sure the "boondoggle" person is gonna be great for urbanism. You're probably right.

Logical Fallacy Alert! Cara calling Metrolink Green Line a potential boondoggle does not automatically mean she's not an "urbanist" or not pro-transit. In fact, her position is that the current proposal is lackluster and should be expanded to the larger project it once was (serving St. Louis County as well as a lot more intra-City stops). Whether you agree with that position is a different question from whether that position is "urbanist" or not. 

If low ridership, limited stops, worse downtown connectivity, and risking future federal transit funding opportunities are the outcome of a "just get it done" mentality, then you can see how Cara's position here actually supports more robust transit investments. The last thing we need is a Loop Trolley 2.0 (a vanity project with limited utility not properly connected to existing transit networks that has undoubtedly set rail transit planning and funding back within the St. Louis region).

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

Auggie wrote:

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

I can almost guarantee that Spencer’s walking/biking/transit mileage is 100x that of Jones.

I was in transportation planning in STL in 2017. It was an open secret that TJ shared disdain for cyclists and bike infrastructure. She hired an ex-Trailnet staffer who promptly got her on MetroLink for a photo-op and gave her a list of buzzwords about bike/ped safety.

“But…but all the new bike lanes being built” almost all of them advocated by private/quasi-private or non-profit organizations for years. All would’ve been built under Krewson/Slay/Spencer with a one-time gift from the feds.

On urbanism? Spencer > Jones by 10,000 miles.

Your case would be stronger if Slay did anything like your claim he "would have done" when he was the mayor for 16 years.

And dude, I'm a bicyclist and I have a distain for other cyclists because they often blatantly violate every traffic law they can.

But I'm sure the "boondoggle" person is gonna be great for urbanism. You're probably right.

You act as if she said “public transportation is a boondoggle”. It is completely fair for someone to see the 2025 versus the 2017 project (including price tag) and think “Are we sure this isn’t a boondoggle?” In a region skating on thin ice with the FTA thanks to the trolley boondoggle especially. Even more so considering the federal landscape is upside down for at least 2 years.

2017 had a connection to Downtown, Old North, and Hyde Park. It had more stops in the densest part of the city. It had more connection to the existing bus and MetroLink system. It was 30% cheaper but went 30% further.

Your argument would be better if any of what you or she said made sense on its face. Like how it's bad that the current plan costs so much, but it's also bad that it's not 17 miles. You can't argue both of these sides, they're contradictory.

The end result is the same with these types- St. Louis gets the short end and will remain a fake city.

Auggie wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

Auggie wrote:
Your case would be stronger if Slay did anything like your claim he "would have done" when he was the mayor for 16 years.

And dude, I'm a bicyclist and I have a distain for other cyclists because they often blatantly violate every traffic law they can.

But I'm sure the "boondoggle" person is gonna be great for urbanism. You're probably right.

You act as if she said “public transportation is a boondoggle”. It is completely fair for someone to see the 2025 versus the 2017 project (including price tag) and think “Are we sure this isn’t a boondoggle?” In a region skating on thin ice with the FTA thanks to the trolley boondoggle especially. Even more so considering the federal landscape is upside down for at least 2 years.

2017 had a connection to Downtown, Old North, and Hyde Park. It had more stops in the densest part of the city. It had more connection to the existing bus and MetroLink system. It was 30% cheaper but went 30% further.

Your argument would be better if any of what you or she said made sense on its face. Like how it's bad that the current plan costs so much, but it's also bad that it's not 17 miles. You can't argue both of these sides, they're contradictory.

The end result is the same with these types- St. Louis gets the short end and will remain a fake city.

Well I certainly didn't argue that it costs too much and that it doesn't go far enough -- is that something you've heard directly from Cara? I haven't. [Edit: potential Straw Man fallacy here]

The point that you glossed over is that you erroneously called any lack of support for the Metrolink Green Line as currently proposed as anti-urbanist. I was pointing out that one can disagree with that particular proposal and still want a different iteration that they feel is superior (whether that's the original Green Line at more than double the cost or a Bus Rapid Transit line at half the cost of the currently proposed line). That person disagreeing is by no means automatically anti-urban or anti-transit merely because they're evaluating the merits of the current proposal.

Auggie wrote:

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

Auggie wrote:
Your case would be stronger if Slay did anything like your claim he "would have done" when he was the mayor for 16 years.

And dude, I'm a bicyclist and I have a distain for other cyclists because they often blatantly violate every traffic law they can.

But I'm sure the "boondoggle" person is gonna be great for urbanism. You're probably right.

You act as if she said “public transportation is a boondoggle”. It is completely fair for someone to see the 2025 versus the 2017 project (including price tag) and think “Are we sure this isn’t a boondoggle?” In a region skating on thin ice with the FTA thanks to the trolley boondoggle especially. Even more so considering the federal landscape is upside down for at least 2 years.

2017 had a connection to Downtown, Old North, and Hyde Park. It had more stops in the densest part of the city. It had more connection to the existing bus and MetroLink system. It was 30% cheaper but went 30% further.

Your argument would be better if any of what you or she said made sense on its face. Like how it's bad that the current plan costs so much, but it's also bad that it's not 17 miles. You can't argue both of these sides, they're contradictory.

The end result is the same with these types- St. Louis gets the short end and will remain a fake city.

Here, let me dumb it down for you Auggie.

Project too small. Small project is still too expensive. Is project still worth doing? Got it?

It’s a perfectly reasonable argument for anyone who can follow more than one complex thought at a time.

stldotage wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

I'd also add that one could imagine a robust Bus Rapid Transit proposal that does both go farther and cost less (and therefore have greater impact), so the stated inconsistency of that position is also flimsy when you actually analyze alternatives.

You can imagine it, as others have, but in reality no BRT in the US comes close to an LRT.

I also don't remember ever interacting with you so I'm not sure why you're acting like I'm talking to you.

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

Just replying what a reporter at the scene texted me.  

There is nothing wrong with putting down a few cold ones when you get elected to the highest office in the city.

All that is yesterday’s news, the Spencer admin starts now with the most important week of her administration, that is announcing who is going to do the actual work as department directors.  Mistakes during this week in hiring those, sets a table for a rough start especially because of federal climate right now, the markets (look at the bond market; if this sticks I think it kills 75% of announced projects)    Good times ahead

if there's nothing wrong with it, it's kinda weird that it was a topic of conversation between you and a reporter, and that you felt the need to drop it into the conversation here. but ok.

Auggie wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

stldotage wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

I'd also add that one could imagine a robust Bus Rapid Transit proposal that does both go farther and cost less (and therefore have greater impact), so the stated inconsistency of that position is also flimsy when you actually analyze alternatives.

You can imagine it, as others have, but in reality no BRT in the US comes close to an LRT.

I also don't remember ever interacting with you so I'm not sure why you're acting like I'm talking to you.

You directly addressed my comment above (see: "Your argument would be better if any of what you or she said made sense on its face. ").

And yeah, anyway, I feel like there's a lot of room for debate on what ideal transit investment looks like in a shrinking metro/city that (at least for the next four years) is subject to the whims of the Trump administration. But I feel you and anyone critiquing Cara on this issue owe it to frame the issue/argument more fairly. Cara is not anti-transit.

stldotage wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

Auggie wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

stldotage wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

I'd also add that one could imagine a robust Bus Rapid Transit proposal that does both go farther and cost less (and therefore have greater impact), so the stated inconsistency of that position is also flimsy when you actually analyze alternatives.

You can imagine it, as others have, but in reality no BRT in the US comes close to an LRT.

I also don't remember ever interacting with you so I'm not sure why you're acting like I'm talking to you.

You directly addressed my comment above (see: "Your argument would be better if any of what you or she said made sense on its face. ").

And yeah, anyway, I feel like there's a lot of room for debate on what ideal transit investment looks like in a shrinking metro/city that (at least for the next four years) is subject to the whims of the Trump administration. But I feel you and anyone critiquing Cara on this issue owe it to frame the issue/argument more fairly. Cara is not anti-transit.

I was responding to addxb2.

I ignored you because you ignore reality in your argument, realities like STL County not being supportive and downtown not being the same employment hub that it was pre-covid. It was pretty self evident.

I've also never said she'd anti-transit. You're the only one who's said that. I've said she's used conservative language to disparage MetroLink expansion and she appears at least to oppose MetroLink expansion that she has supported her entire career. In fact, I've actually defended her in the past on MetroLink and transit- before she decided to call the Green Line a boondoggle.

Spencer should be rolling out here admin in the next 24-48 hours.  This is the most critical week of her Mayoralship. Cant f this up 

Ward breakdown shows regional, racial divide in St. Louis Mayor's race

Spencer vs Jones*

W1: 79-21
W2: 86-14
W3: 57-43
W4: 82-18
W5: 81-19
W6: 64-36
W7: 52-48
W8: 75-25
W9: 67-33
W10: 49-51*
W11: 31-69*
W12: 29-71*
W13: 32-68*
W14: 44-56*

Jones flipped W10, gained in W14

Hey, what's better than a sloshed single mom if you know what I mean . Even then, I would still need to verify a stance on trackless trams.

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Apr 09, 2025

Ward breakdown shows regional, racial divide in St. Louis Mayor's race

Spencer vs Jones*

W1: 79-21
W2: 86-14
W3: 57-43
W4: 82-18
W5: 81-19
W6: 64-36
W7: 52-48
W8: 75-25
W9: 67-33
W10: 49-51*
W11: 31-69*
W12: 29-71*
W13: 32-68*
W14: 44-56*

Jones flipped W10, gained in W14

This result is far less racially and regionally divided than most past democratic primaries have been.

The wards Jones won all had less turnout than the heavy Spencer wards from what they said on NPR today.

Biggest change from 2021 is the flip of Ward 6 (was 15 and 8 in 2021) that makes up Shaw and TGS, jones won those 3,673 to 2,650 (58-42%) and this time lost it 3,289 to 1875 (64-36%), 2,437 vote swing.