urbanSTL

whitherSTL wrote: ↑

May 16, 2017

First off, he ripped the County just as much as the City. And have you ever realized that maybe this region needs to hear this criticism so it changes its ways. Do you realize the status quo is not working? Do you realize the communities can not tax their way out of declining revenues?

As Nick Pistor continually says on TWTR, the city WILL have to file BK in the next 5 years if everything stays the same.

“The population is going south. The education in the city is going south. Their transportation and airport is going south,” Richard said.

He's right about population, but city education if anything seems to be improving slightly, and Lambert has been expanding, so he sounds a little bit like a broken clock to me. And while I agree about reentry, "let's shake things up" isn't exactly a substantive argument.

And knowing Republicans, when he says St. Louis will probably blow the infrastructure money on "umbrellas and stuff", the "stuff" in his mind is probably transit or poor people.

You still can't tax yourself out of declining revenues. Go to a 7-11 in the city and look at your receipt after you buy something. The sales tax is staggering. Chicago-esque. And we have 311,000 people.

I actually think that Moleg would push a merger bill to spite St. Louis, but in reality it would be the best thing the state government could do for the city. Let's face it, if left to our own devices St. Louis will continue to dwindle into irrelevance. Being considered a violent, dying city of 300,000 or less is not good for economic growth and since Ferguson the region really hasn't done crap to address any systemic problems (largely do to our fragmentation). St. Louis is in real dire need of leveraging our resources for the greater good. I say bring it on.

^ bravo

whitherSTL wrote: ↑

May 16, 2017

Go to a 7-11 in the city and look at your receipt after you buy something. The sales tax is staggering.

And set to go up again in January.

There's absolutely no reason that cities such as Omaha Wichita Des Moines be seen as more profitable and progressive cities no kick to them however St.Louis has so much more to offer than those cities however our own citizens are willing to drive not only the city but the county and the region down the funnel to the point of no return so damn right I'm all for a forced merger if and when it goes to a vote for us no pun intended however the boomers of St.Louis will vote no on a potential merger and thats just the sorry sad reality of St.Louisan's cutting the throat to their own city. The time is now not 5-10-20 years from now there should be so much more development/investment throughout all of St.Louis including the founding city center however thats not the case and whatever developments the city gets moves slower than icebergs melting..
This shouldn't be a wait and see situation this should be a now situation the longer our leaders procrastinate the quicker we fall behind..
Theres more than the potential for growth theres the potential for moderate sustained growth.
I'm sure Pierre and Auguste would say the city they founded deserve so much better than this future and they surely be disappointed.
At the end of the day merging will benefit all of St.Louis.
Lets combine our 998,000/311,000 to 1.3 Million and take it from there.
A new St.Louis will be highly attractive than the old less attractive St.Louis we see today!

goat314 wrote: ↑

May 16, 2017

I actually think that Moleg would push a merger bill to spite St. Louis, but in reality it would be the best thing the state government could do for the city. Let's face it, if left to our own devices St. Louis will continue to dwindle into irrelevance. Being considered a violent, dying city of 300,000 or less is not good for economic growth and since Ferguson the region really hasn't done crap to address any systemic problems (largely do to our fragmentation). St. Louis is in real dire need of leveraging our resources for the greater good. I say bring it on.

Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons would be a huge improvement for the state leg.

There is no reason whatsoever to believe that the City is going to go bankrupt in the next 5 years.

Ebsy wrote: ↑

May 17, 2017

There is no reason whatsoever to believe that the City is going to go bankrupt in the next 5 years.

Financial issues in the next 5 years, sure that's a given especially with all the tax abatements but bankruptcy talk is a joke. We are no where even close to what Detroit went through

^ Keep in mind that all of the properties with tax abatements were constructed on underperforming lots previously paying little to nothing in taxes.

^True. But now those lots (mainly the empty lots) also have people living there that require government services. So the taxes they pay now likely don't cover the costs for them by the government. So while there were no taxes being generated on those lots before, there also wasn't any money being spent on those lots. Now we are bringing in abated taxes on those lots, but likely spending more than that on the lot.

pat wrote: ↑

May 18, 2017

^True. But now those lots (mainly the empty lots) also have people living there that require government services. So the taxes they pay now likely don't cover the costs for them by the government. So while there were no taxes being generated on those lots before, there also wasn't any money being spent on those lots. Now we are bringing in abated taxes on those lots, but likely spending more than that on the lot.

I would disagree with your logic based on the fact that city has had stagnant population and city services cost IMO relates more to the number of people & public infrastructure then private structures. I think what is happening is that city manpower hours & services are probably more focused on the central corridor as population consolidates or at least has grown along the middle of the city. At the same time, you will might see a decrease in services in parts of the north city as population continues to decline and service in south city remain steady with population remaining flat. Another way to put to it, city services such as police or health services are responding to a person needs not a building calling and fixed infrastructure such as streets, parks have not changes.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 88df5.html

The St. Louis region's two top local leaders on Monday re-launched the effort to reunify the city and county, releasing a report showing upwards of a billion dollars a year in waste from the inefficiency of the city-county division and announcing a task force to create a specific proposal to change that.

100+ new taxes in St. Louis region the last few years.
http://www.kmov.com/story/35647549/100- ... study-says

hoffa270 wrote:http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 88df5.html

The St. Louis region's two top local leaders on Monday re-launched the effort to reunify the city and county, releasing a report showing upwards of a billion dollars a year in waste from the inefficiency of the city-county division and announcing a task force to create a specific proposal to change that.

All this empty vapor about efficiencies to be gained, and yet from the only document BT has produced that addresses costs:

The construction of 24 additional firehouses within St. Louis County would be required. These firehouses would be constructed over a 5-year period. These firehouses would cost approximately $5.5 million per house. This onetime cost for firehouse construction would be roughly $132 million.

We estimate the unified department would need 24 additional fire engines at a cost of $750,000 per engine. This cost does not factor in bulk discounts, based on economies of scale, which would be achieved when the unified department purchases equipment as one entity. However, a conservative estimate of fire engine costs would be $18,000,000. The purchasing of additional 32 ambulances, at a cost of $300,000 per ambulance, would be $9,600,000. The addition of two hook and ladder trucks, at a cost of $1 million each, places the projected cost at $2 million. A rough estimate of eight special operations units is included at $750,000 per unit.

As mentioned previously, the cost of hiring an estimated 1,255 new employees for the new department, fully implemented, is $100 million. The cost of fringe benefits for those employees is $56 million. This brings the grand total to $156 million for the new hires.

For the 1,130 firefighter-paramedics who would help staff the new firehouses to ensure they meet the NFPA 1710 standards for service, the estimated first-year cost is $9,514,415.

So some very specific costs - but when you're looking for how much this will save, all we get is hollow nonsense like:

Simply put, fire protection is a factor considered by companies looking to locate to a region. Improving the level of fire service provision in a region fosters an environment that is ripe for economic growth.

Or, at best, such a unification

presents opportunities for cost savings

(emphasis mine)

And all those extra fire chiefs, shift commanders, and so on which are so commonly cited? No efficiencies there?? Nope.

Of the $351 million combined budgets14 of the 43 departments, $186 million represents salaries. Salary costs would increase as salaries are brought to parity.

(emphasis mine)

Most of the savings would be attributed to purchasing power - something that I agree SHOULD be done TODAY - and does not require unification or "bringing salaries into parity" (i.e. paying firefighter/EMTs well into six figure salaries).

They're going to have to do a lot better with lyrics if they want to sing the Efficiencies tune.

hoffa270 wrote: ↑

Jun 12, 2017

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 88df5.html

The St. Louis region's two top local leaders on Monday re-launched the effort to reunify the city and county, releasing a report showing upwards of a billion dollars a year in waste from the inefficiency of the city-county division and announcing a task force to create a specific proposal to change that.

I'm not sure what to think about this. Obviously, the big news is Stenger coming around. However, if the City and County were actually serious, I think there would be a bigger task force that includes people who actually have local government experience. Someone with experience with the state legislature would also be a good addition.

south compton wrote: ↑

Jun 13, 2017

hoffa270 wrote: ↑

Jun 12, 2017

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 88df5.html

The St. Louis region's two top local leaders on Monday re-launched the effort to reunify the city and county, releasing a report showing upwards of a billion dollars a year in waste from the inefficiency of the city-county division and announcing a task force to create a specific proposal to change that.

I'm not sure what to think about this. Obviously, the big news is Stenger coming around. However, if the City and County were actually serious, I think there would be a bigger task force that includes people who actually have local government experience. Someone with experience with the state legislature would also be a good addition.

There will be a bigger task force beyond the three announced, they said so during their press conference. I was a little disappointed to hear this is a taskforce to study what BTSTL already has. To think we might be in the same place a year from now kind of takes the wind out of my sails. Looking at the big picture though, we might actually have a vote and resolution before 2020 which is the earliest I hoped for.

9ine Runner wrote: ↑

Jun 14, 2017

south compton wrote: ↑

Jun 13, 2017

hoffa270 wrote: ↑

Jun 12, 2017

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 88df5.html

I'm not sure what to think about this. Obviously, the big news is Stenger coming around. However, if the City and County were actually serious, I think there would be a bigger task force that includes people who actually have local government experience. Someone with experience with the state legislature would also be a good addition.

There will be a bigger task force beyond the three announced, they said so during their press conference. I was a little disappointed to hear this is a taskforce to study what BTSTL already has. To think we might be in the same place a year from now kind of takes the wind out of my sails. Looking at the big picture though, we might actually have a vote and resolution before 2020 which is the earliest I hoped for.

Same issue I had with it. Another year, at least, of sitting on our hands. Same with all the Metrolink studies. How many years has it taken to build the Cortex station? We voted on the Metrolink expansion, how many years will we wait for that study? Why couldn't we have done that years ago before the vote even occurred?

There just seems to be a lack of effort. Perhaps I'm just uninformed, but it feels like we're going to wait all this time, for nothing to even happen. We need some real movers and shakers in the city to step up and show that there is some actual soul here.

I agree, especially when the subject has been scrutinized pretty heavily for the last 5 years.

My worst fear is that Stenger will sh*t on any proposition after the study and is just doing this for a PR stunt.

bprop wrote: ↑

Jun 13, 2017

Of the $351 million combined budgets14 of the 43 departments, $186 million represents salaries. Salary costs would increase as salaries are brought to parity.

(emphasis mine)

Most of the savings would be attributed to purchasing power - something that I agree SHOULD be done TODAY - and does not require unification or "bringing salaries into parity" (i.e. paying firefighter/EMTs well into six figure salaries).

They're going to have to do a lot better with lyrics if they want to sing the Efficiencies tune.

How much of those past salary increases were due to inter-district competition that would no longer be an issue going forward?

MarkHaversham wrote: ↑

Jun 15, 2017

bprop wrote: ↑

Jun 13, 2017

Of the $351 million combined budgets14 of the 43 departments, $186 million represents salaries. Salary costs would increase as salaries are brought to parity.

(emphasis mine)

Most of the savings would be attributed to purchasing power - something that I agree SHOULD be done TODAY - and does not require unification or "bringing salaries into parity" (i.e. paying firefighter/EMTs well into six figure salaries).

They're going to have to do a lot better with lyrics if they want to sing the Efficiencies tune.

How much of those past salary increases were due to inter-district competition that would no longer be an issue going forward?

I have no idea - by asking, are you implying that you have some data? Municipal fire departments haven't seemed to face this issue and I'm not aware of widespread personnel or staffing issues. And I don't see the need to propagate the absurdity and bake it into the salary structure of a unified metro-wide fire district.