arch city wrote:
I actually really like this idea. St. Louis: The Happiest City in America seems like a good motto. Sounds right the same way that Boston Strong, and Keep Portland/Austin Weird, and America's Finest City (San Diego) sound right.
I actually really like this idea. St. Louis: The Happiest City in America seems like a good motto. Sounds right the same way that Boston Strong, and Keep Portland/Austin Weird, and America's Finest City (San Diego) sound right.
- 592
In light of the comparisons being made to Chicago, NYC, and KC:
1. If St. Louis City and St. Louis County had a unified, truly metropolitan police department, our homicide rate and our crime rate would be lower than Chicago and KC.
2. For the last five years, 60% of the crime decline in the region has been due to crime declines in the city of St. Louis (keep in mind that the city only represents about 30% of regional crime).
3. NYC includes five counties, two of which (Staten Island and Queens) combined are equivalent in size to the entire St. Louis region, and their median incomes are above the national average and their poverty rate is below the national average. Staten Island, population 470,000, had a total of six homicides in 2013.
4. Chicago has 700,000 fewer people today than it did in 1965. Comparing raw numbers of homicides and crime makes for very bad statistical analysis, but great headlines.
5. St. Louis City and St. Louis County have 70 police and sheriffs departments, and the citizens pay the salaries and benefits of 70 police chiefs and sheriffs. Assuming that the average patrol officer earns 2/3 of the average chief or sheriff, by ending the status of 70 independent police chiefs and sheriffs, you could net 92 more patrol officers. That means you could put 92 more patrol officers on the streets of the Loop, Downtown, College Hill, Forest Park, or anywhere else you pleased.
In light of this, the greatest thing our region could do would be for the city and county police and sheriffs departments to merge. Not in 2016, not next year, but now.
1. If St. Louis City and St. Louis County had a unified, truly metropolitan police department, our homicide rate and our crime rate would be lower than Chicago and KC.
2. For the last five years, 60% of the crime decline in the region has been due to crime declines in the city of St. Louis (keep in mind that the city only represents about 30% of regional crime).
3. NYC includes five counties, two of which (Staten Island and Queens) combined are equivalent in size to the entire St. Louis region, and their median incomes are above the national average and their poverty rate is below the national average. Staten Island, population 470,000, had a total of six homicides in 2013.
4. Chicago has 700,000 fewer people today than it did in 1965. Comparing raw numbers of homicides and crime makes for very bad statistical analysis, but great headlines.
5. St. Louis City and St. Louis County have 70 police and sheriffs departments, and the citizens pay the salaries and benefits of 70 police chiefs and sheriffs. Assuming that the average patrol officer earns 2/3 of the average chief or sheriff, by ending the status of 70 independent police chiefs and sheriffs, you could net 92 more patrol officers. That means you could put 92 more patrol officers on the streets of the Loop, Downtown, College Hill, Forest Park, or anywhere else you pleased.
In light of this, the greatest thing our region could do would be for the city and county police and sheriffs departments to merge. Not in 2016, not next year, but now.
Indy had more murders than St. Louis, but their murder rate is less than half. That's because the box they draw and call Indianapolis contains 800k people.
- 8,155
^ true, but two things:
1) Indy's recent rise is alarming but this is the first year over 100.
2) If we drew a box with downtown at its center and filled with 800K we'd still have a much higher 2013 homicide rate than Indy's.
There really is no sugar coating our bleak homicide numbers. Sure, we can come up with other places that also have continued troubles but the situation here in a large part of our urban core remains a crisis and should not be tolerated.
1) Indy's recent rise is alarming but this is the first year over 100.
2) If we drew a box with downtown at its center and filled with 800K we'd still have a much higher 2013 homicide rate than Indy's.
There really is no sugar coating our bleak homicide numbers. Sure, we can come up with other places that also have continued troubles but the situation here in a large part of our urban core remains a crisis and should not be tolerated.
Didn't say it should be tolerated. I'm pointing out that it isn't unique either. It just looks better in some other metros.
- 3,762
you can always selectively redefine boundaries to make things look better or worse, of course. we could probably do the same with Indy, though.roger wyoming II wrote:If we drew a box with downtown at its center and filled with 800K we'd still have a much higher 2013 homicide rate than Indy's.
i posted the NYC article only because I was struck by the fact that they have ~26x more people–densely packed for the most part–but less than 3x the number of murders. of course, they also have many many times the resources.
So....anyone have final homicide number/rate and index crime rate for 2013?
As expressed before, there are different social and economic dynamics (poverty, education, race, employment) as well as multiple metrics (city boundaries, population etc.) that factor into crime numbers from city-to-city nationally.
People are not "sugar coating" or excusing St. Louis' numbers. They are what they are. We all are dismayed by them. In my opinion, one homicide is too many, but the fact is there are many variables that play into St. Louis' high crime numbers. Leading criminologists and the FBI have noted this as well.
There were 20 homicides in St. Louis County in 2013. There were about the same in all of East St. Louis - a city of about 33,000. While 20 is WAY TOO MANY, for a county of nearly 1-million people to have only 20 homicides is remarkable. However, it speaks to the socio-economic disparities between St. Louis City, E. St. Louis and St. Louis County.
Further, it would be most helpful, I think, to combine the numbers and some law enforcement departments because let's face it, county residents commit crimes in the city and vice versa. If other region's across the country have built-in advantages as well as manipulate other metrics in their favor, why not St. Louis?
If the numbers are tweaked a bit, this doesn't mean the political and social leadership should stop working on the crime problem and resolving economic disparities.
Try it, see how it works, then change it back if it becomes to problematic or isn't working.
People are not "sugar coating" or excusing St. Louis' numbers. They are what they are. We all are dismayed by them. In my opinion, one homicide is too many, but the fact is there are many variables that play into St. Louis' high crime numbers. Leading criminologists and the FBI have noted this as well.
There were 20 homicides in St. Louis County in 2013. There were about the same in all of East St. Louis - a city of about 33,000. While 20 is WAY TOO MANY, for a county of nearly 1-million people to have only 20 homicides is remarkable. However, it speaks to the socio-economic disparities between St. Louis City, E. St. Louis and St. Louis County.
Further, it would be most helpful, I think, to combine the numbers and some law enforcement departments because let's face it, county residents commit crimes in the city and vice versa. If other region's across the country have built-in advantages as well as manipulate other metrics in their favor, why not St. Louis?
If the numbers are tweaked a bit, this doesn't mean the political and social leadership should stop working on the crime problem and resolving economic disparities.
Try it, see how it works, then change it back if it becomes to problematic or isn't working.
Below is a video from Memphis. This may be another example of how cities skew numbers.
It's interesting how there were actually 150 overall homicides, but because 21 were deemed "justifiable" (with no criminal intent), Memphis Police Department puts their homicide number at 129 for 2013. Memphis still had more "criminal homicides" than St. Louis, but I also wonder how many of St. Louis' homicides were "justifiable/non-criminal"? And because Memphis's population and city boundaries are larger, Memphis will likely get a better break than St. Louis in the national media.
See Fox 13 Video: MPD: Number of Homicides Decrease in 2013
It's interesting how there were actually 150 overall homicides, but because 21 were deemed "justifiable" (with no criminal intent), Memphis Police Department puts their homicide number at 129 for 2013. Memphis still had more "criminal homicides" than St. Louis, but I also wonder how many of St. Louis' homicides were "justifiable/non-criminal"? And because Memphis's population and city boundaries are larger, Memphis will likely get a better break than St. Louis in the national media.
See Fox 13 Video: MPD: Number of Homicides Decrease in 2013
- 2,929
The two most significant common element among STL homicides are:
1. They are committed primarily by poor black young men, often involved in gangs and evolved from economic disenfranchisement; and
2. They involve illegal guns.
The first element is resultant from over a hundred years of broad social marginalization and the exclusion of this demographic from participation in broader economics. Or, it's just harder for some folk to get a good job and uplift themselves, due to a multitude of factors, and none of which being cured singularly will change the entire dynamic. I wish I was more eloquent in my wording here, especially when speaking bluntly of a wide swath of our society.
Ways to amend this include 1) education, 2) employment, 3) family structures, and 4) the ingrained belief into poor children that they can rise up and do more with their lives, and have this actually happen. There's no quick fix here. This is multi-generational.
In the absence of total cultural turnaround, what can happen now is a broad campaign to place significantly more impacting consequences on those involved with illegal guns. This can range from those that buy guns for illegal purposes, to those caught in possession of illegal guns, to those who commit crimes with illegal guns.
Idea: If the use of a gun in a crime brings in that much heavier a punishment, then that'll discourage gun play. Even if that just means people fight more often with fists or knives, it's better than 17 year olds shooting at people in Downtown.
Therefore, I'd encourage a joint City-County-East Side move to eliminate illegal guns in the public reach. Offer buybacks of illegal guns on a regular basis. Welcome in more ATF to help initiate programs to quell this. Hell, get the NRA involved to support this; if it's illegal guns that kill, rather than registered ones, have them help the process through outreach to gun sellers to cooperate fully and help in the collecting of illegal firearms. After all, we all need to work together on this.
Meanwhile, work to pass legislation that will increase by a full 25% share the jail time and/or fines involved with cases involving illegal guns. Look to establishing a Gun Court within the City court system, similar to how drug courts operate.
Culmination: Announce that broad punishments for illegal guns will take place by a certain date, say six months' time. At the same time, welcome new programs for buybacks of illegal guns in the City, County, and Metro East, from citizens, by police departments, all in anticipation of the new illegal gun laws going into effect. Then, once this happens, our Police and Courts relentlessly prosecute illegal guns.
If this comes down as heavy-handed policing, then so be it. I'm sick of too many young men getting killed, and wasting their lives in overcrowded prisons, because they choose to play gangsta. Getting rid of illegal guns could do a world of good in STL.
1. They are committed primarily by poor black young men, often involved in gangs and evolved from economic disenfranchisement; and
2. They involve illegal guns.
The first element is resultant from over a hundred years of broad social marginalization and the exclusion of this demographic from participation in broader economics. Or, it's just harder for some folk to get a good job and uplift themselves, due to a multitude of factors, and none of which being cured singularly will change the entire dynamic. I wish I was more eloquent in my wording here, especially when speaking bluntly of a wide swath of our society.
Ways to amend this include 1) education, 2) employment, 3) family structures, and 4) the ingrained belief into poor children that they can rise up and do more with their lives, and have this actually happen. There's no quick fix here. This is multi-generational.
In the absence of total cultural turnaround, what can happen now is a broad campaign to place significantly more impacting consequences on those involved with illegal guns. This can range from those that buy guns for illegal purposes, to those caught in possession of illegal guns, to those who commit crimes with illegal guns.
Idea: If the use of a gun in a crime brings in that much heavier a punishment, then that'll discourage gun play. Even if that just means people fight more often with fists or knives, it's better than 17 year olds shooting at people in Downtown.
Therefore, I'd encourage a joint City-County-East Side move to eliminate illegal guns in the public reach. Offer buybacks of illegal guns on a regular basis. Welcome in more ATF to help initiate programs to quell this. Hell, get the NRA involved to support this; if it's illegal guns that kill, rather than registered ones, have them help the process through outreach to gun sellers to cooperate fully and help in the collecting of illegal firearms. After all, we all need to work together on this.
Meanwhile, work to pass legislation that will increase by a full 25% share the jail time and/or fines involved with cases involving illegal guns. Look to establishing a Gun Court within the City court system, similar to how drug courts operate.
Culmination: Announce that broad punishments for illegal guns will take place by a certain date, say six months' time. At the same time, welcome new programs for buybacks of illegal guns in the City, County, and Metro East, from citizens, by police departments, all in anticipation of the new illegal gun laws going into effect. Then, once this happens, our Police and Courts relentlessly prosecute illegal guns.
If this comes down as heavy-handed policing, then so be it. I'm sick of too many young men getting killed, and wasting their lives in overcrowded prisons, because they choose to play gangsta. Getting rid of illegal guns could do a world of good in STL.
- 8,155
A lot of these shootings aren't even gang related but are relationship related, many times started by typical feuds of teens/young adults where some fool decides to pop off a gun instead of dealing with things through more constructive ways -- and then retaliation works its way through the system. I understand through a teacher friend that Roosevelt High has been dealing with a lot of this in particular this year. I wonder what events led to the killing of the (Sumner?) High school student at the bus stop in the morning... probably something so minor in the scheme of things. I think Boston has had a lot of success in its massive drop in homicides in part by focusing on intervening in incidents prone to retaliation.gone corporate wrote:The two most significant common element among STL homicides are:
1. They are committed primarily by poor black young men, often involved in gangs and evolved from economic disenfranchisement; and
2. They involve illegal guns.
i agree. While I am not a fan of comparing homicide rates (other than to compare to general trends in urban areas and seeing if anything can be applied here to what tactics may seem to work elsewhere), I do believe the fairest way in general is to combine the main city with the main county to get the overall rate -- Saint Louis City + Saint Louis County, Baltimore City + Baltimore County, Pittsburgh + Allegheny County, Indy + Hamilton County. Cleveland + Cuyahoga County, etc....arch city wrote: Further, it would be most helpful, I think, to combine the numbers
While it is not perfect as KC for example spills into 3 counties and StL wouldn't include anything across the river, I think it is a lot better than looking at MSAs as who the heck cares what the crime rate is in Podunk county. This should give folks a more solid apples to apples comparison of what "city living" is like in a particular metro.
I don't agree at all with that. Chicago doesn't have 700,000 fewer people than last year or the year before that or the year before that or even 2004 or 1994. The truth is that aside from an atypically brutal 2012, the City has seen a strong drop in homicides and violent crime in recent years and its overall crime rate is the lowest since 1972.stlhistory wrote:In light of the comparisons being made to Chicago, NYC, and KC:
4. Chicago has 700,000 fewer people today than it did in 1965. Comparing raw numbers of homicides and crime makes for very bad statistical analysis, but great headlines.
Ours has dropped as well, but not nearly to the extent of places like Chicago, NYC, Boston, D.C. and LA. Why is that? I'm not sure but there is no denying that we haven't seen the progress that some former "murder capitals of the nation" have seen.
One particularly huge drop in crime among smaller cities that isn't commonly recognized is Richmond, VA:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richmond,_Virginia#Crime
I remember this city being in the "murder capitals" list beside St. Louis back in the 90s. Now, it is not even in the top 50 most dangerous cities. They went from 60 murders/100k to 5 murders/100k. This is an absolutely remarkable conversion of a city from being incredibly dangerous to incredibly safe basically overnight.
What has changed? They stuck a state college in the middle of the city (they elevated a pre-existing community college to University status) and then aggressively expanded it to be the largest university in the state at 32 thousand students over a decade, which displaced all the criminal elements.
Lesson: We need more higher education in the city. I stand by my assertion that, by far, the best use of a billion dollars or even several hundred million dollars worth of investment in the city would be found a new state college downtown or the near northside.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richmond,_Virginia#Crime
I remember this city being in the "murder capitals" list beside St. Louis back in the 90s. Now, it is not even in the top 50 most dangerous cities. They went from 60 murders/100k to 5 murders/100k. This is an absolutely remarkable conversion of a city from being incredibly dangerous to incredibly safe basically overnight.
What has changed? They stuck a state college in the middle of the city (they elevated a pre-existing community college to University status) and then aggressively expanded it to be the largest university in the state at 32 thousand students over a decade, which displaced all the criminal elements.
Lesson: We need more higher education in the city. I stand by my assertion that, by far, the best use of a billion dollars or even several hundred million dollars worth of investment in the city would be found a new state college downtown or the near northside.
- 3,762
displacing the criminal element with higher education infrastructure isn't the same as educating them. more higher ed infrastructure in the city might lead to a larger student population and thereby more foot traffic (which is probably how VCU has benefitted Richmond), but not necessarily a student population composed of those who need it most. you have to first motivate the criminal element to go to school and then ensure that they have the resources. St. Louis already has more higher ed institutions than Richmond, and i think UMSL is pretty comparable to VCU in terms of affordability/curriculum/quality of education. i'm sure that VCU contributed to Richmond's drop in crime, but i suspect it's not the primary contributor.JuanHamez wrote:What has changed? They stuck a state college in the middle of the city (they elevated a pre-existing community college to University status) and then aggressively expanded it to be the largest university in the state at 32 thousand students over a decade, which displaced all the criminal elements.
Lesson: We need more higher education in the city. I stand by my assertion that, by far, the best use of a billion dollars or even several hundred million dollars worth of investment in the city would be found a new state college downtown or the near northside.
Unfortunately, St. Louis has always had a high homicide rate. ALWAYS. Long before the population slide, gang activity was always problematic in the city from mobsters to the current street gangs. Poverty, poor schools, etc. have been a nagging problem in St. Louis City for DECADES. The same old formula nets the same results.roger wyoming II wrote:Ours has dropped as well, but not nearly to the extent of places like Chicago, NYC, Boston, D.C. and LA. Why is that? I'm not sure but there is no denying that we haven't seen the progress that some former "murder capitals of the nation" have seen.
On the flip side, there was a time St. Louis City alone used to have between 250-300 murders in any given year in the 70's and 80's. Now a larger St. Louis metro area doesn't even have that many. To me, that's progress even though the City of St. Louis still bears the brunt of the region's homicides. Check out this Wiki link, Crime In St. Louis.
Further, cities like Chicago, NYC, and DC - despite their current problems - have gentrified faster. Chicago looks like a completely different city than it did just 15-20 years ago. Go to Brooklyn, Harlem, Hell's Kitchen etc. in NYC. Even the Bronx. St. Louis has changed aesthetically too, and is gentrifying faster than many peer and larger cities, but its population has shrunk faster and the black middle-class has nearly left. New York, Chicago and Washington D.C. have more jobs in the city, more government and corporate resources, less poverty. This is a fact.
St. Louis' leadership has to get angry. Where are the CONTINUOUS town hall meetings that would seek to address socio-economic and educational disparities with vigor and new ideas? Enough already of the racial, ward and old-guard politics.
I agree 1000%. The City's State College, however, is Harris-Stowe State University.JuanHamez wrote:Lesson: We need more higher education in the city. I stand by my assertion that, by far, the best use of a billion dollars or even several hundred million dollars worth of investment in the city would be found a new state college downtown or the near northside.
In my opinion, the City of St. Louis - in partnership with university officials - just doesn't do enough to seek expansion of programs (and schools ie. pharmacy, medicine, law, technology, engineering, health, transportation, science, dental etc.) at HSSU.
HSSU is growing, but not fast enough in programs that could nurture St. Louis' economic goals.
Holy Moly. I somehow forgot about HSSU. It is a pretty small school right now (its wikipedia page is also pitifully short) so definitely a good target for expansion. First, I'd change its name. Having a dual name is TERRIBLE for recognition (hence why I forgot it). Probably something like Harris State or Missouri State at St. Louis would be better.arch city wrote:I agree 1000%. The City's State College, however, is Harris-Stowe State University.JuanHamez wrote:Lesson: We need more higher education in the city. I stand by my assertion that, by far, the best use of a billion dollars or even several hundred million dollars worth of investment in the city would be found a new state college downtown or the near northside.
I'd love to see it to expand to something like 30 to 40 thousand students (of all races too, despite its current historically black status). Maybe also give it a concentration too... like IT/Finance/Engineering/Biology to cater to the companies in the area. The buildings for expansion are there for the taking... the industrial storefronts north of Olive could conceivably easily be turned into classrooms for an urban campus feel. Yes, thats more than 30 times its current size but not impossible given what other state schools have done in two decades (VCU). The question is, would the School, City, and the State back something game changing like that? And where would the money come from? If you're going to launch a previously unknown, new, or newly expanded school into the ranks of the nationally renowned, you will need ~300 million endowment at least and major scholarships to attract good students. I'm thinking about what the Olin School of Engineering in Massachusetts did to go from barren soil to a renowned engineering school in 15 years.
I still would like to see a University among the skyscrapers downtown though. I've often wondered if Fontbonne should just sell its land so that WashU can expand, and then move to one of the huge buildings downtown. I don't know the inside layout of the railway exchange building, but I always thought its huge size would make for a great urban university housed all under one roof...
How about another college at the site of the old Carter Carbeurator facility at the intersection of Grand aaaaaaaaaand........wait for it............University.
Right in the middle of a really depressed part of North City that could use the influx of students with high expectations regarding nuisance and property crime. Right next to a big park that could use some love. Right next to the still intact streets of Garrison, Hebert, Greer, Sullivan, and Palm. And a little over a mile via St. Louis Avenue to the center of Old North.
Right in the middle of a really depressed part of North City that could use the influx of students with high expectations regarding nuisance and property crime. Right next to a big park that could use some love. Right next to the still intact streets of Garrison, Hebert, Greer, Sullivan, and Palm. And a little over a mile via St. Louis Avenue to the center of Old North.
^^That is indeed a good spot.
While we're on the topic of possible sites for universities, one final site that I've often dreamed about is a big university in Illinois across the river from the Arch. Maybe convincing Illinois buy out Casino Queen and the Cargill site and building a "University of Illinois at St. Louis" with Martin Park as its center lawn. It would instantly become one of the most scenic campuses in the country with the arch as the backdrop. It would also motivate people to use that metrolink station and make walking across the historic Ead's bridge scenic and desirable.
So much potential for making St. Louis a college town.
While we're on the topic of possible sites for universities, one final site that I've often dreamed about is a big university in Illinois across the river from the Arch. Maybe convincing Illinois buy out Casino Queen and the Cargill site and building a "University of Illinois at St. Louis" with Martin Park as its center lawn. It would instantly become one of the most scenic campuses in the country with the arch as the backdrop. It would also motivate people to use that metrolink station and make walking across the historic Ead's bridge scenic and desirable.
So much potential for making St. Louis a college town.
- 933
I have this fantasy where the Lemp Brewery becomes a mixed-use community based around a college. There wouldn't be housing on-campus for all the students so some of them would have to live in houses nearby, prompting loads of rehabs and new construction. It would really add a lot to Cherokee.
I like the idea of a campus on the East Riverfront as well. ESTL has a lot of untapped potential. Imagine if the campus had a football stadium pointed right at the skyline!
I like the idea of a campus on the East Riverfront as well. ESTL has a lot of untapped potential. Imagine if the campus had a football stadium pointed right at the skyline!
Great idea.JuanHamez wrote: While we're on the topic of possible sites for universities, one final site that I've often dreamed about is a big university in Illinois across the river from the Arch. Maybe convincing Illinois buy out Casino Queen and the Cargill site and building a "University of Illinois at St. Louis" with Martin Park as its center lawn. It would instantly become one of the most scenic campuses in the country with the arch as the backdrop. It would also motivate people to use that metrolink station and make walking across the historic Ead's bridge scenic and desirable.
I'm reading "Eagan's Rats: The Untold Story of the Prohibition-Era Gang That Ruled St. Louis" right now. I knew little about what crime was like in the city around the turn of the century. Even if just half of what is in this book is true, the state of crime in St. Louis a century ago was on a different level. You got routine broad daylight gunfights in the middle of downtown streets, state's witnesses under "police protection" being bumped off on the front steps of the courthouse, polling locations being controlled by the mob's hooligans on election day, Tom Eagan, the undisputed mob boss of STL, doing an open interview with the Post Dispatch basically saying "Yeah, I run this town, but I'm fair, anyone we bump off has it coming".arch city wrote:Unfortunately, St. Louis has always had a high homicide rate. ALWAYS. Long before the population slide, gang activity was always problematic in the city from mobsters to the current street gangs.
It reads a little choppy, but from an informational standpoint its been worth it. I grabbed it off the shelf on a whim on my last visit to the St. Louis Room at the Central Library. One of my trips a month or two back I grabbed "Crooks Kill, Cops Lie: The True Story of the St. Louis Mobster Wars". Found it to be an interesting read. Auto bio from a local cop (turned federal agent) investigating St. Louis mob activity from the 70's into the early 80's. He paints some interesting pictures of what downtown and other parts of STL were like back then. Example: I never knew the Paul Brown building was HQ for the city's diamond trade back then. Love learning this kind of random history about the city.Mark Groth wrote:I'm adding that to my reading list.