^ The goal should be to increase the population of all races but our traditional pattern of redevelopment is having the result of blacks actually leaving these places... the challenge is how can we all work together to better keep all populations in our central neighborhoods. I don't know a whole lot about Kennedy, but certainly he is entitled to concerns about his loss of his constituents as a result of being shuffled out.
But should the city be almost 50% black when the region is less than 20% black, with almost half the city approaching 100% black? I get the spirit of your comment, but I think it misses the root of the deep divisions in the city and in the metro, which is how demographically lopsided every corner of the metro actually is. With that being the situation, fragmentation is a natural result.
Don't aldermen represent their districts, not the city as a whole? Isn't that the point of having alderman and not at large elections?
Precisely why STL can't have at large aldermen quickly enough. The fragmentation must stop.
^ As I said the goal should be to increase the population of all races in the city.... I hope I'm wrong, but you seem to be in support of actively shipping black people out of centrally-located neighborhoods.
leeharveyawesome wrote:Hey white people get hip to this- according to some on this forum if you're white and you choose to live in Ballwin you're an anti-urban probable racist who doesn't want to live around black people. But if you choose to live in, say, Fountain Park or even around Cherokee you're an a**hole who's driving out the black people.
Your other options are places like San Diego or Portland or Austin (or even Kansas City!) where you're free to live wherever you want without all the bullsh*t.
Can someone please come up with a reliable list to make it easier for any prospective St. Louis resident's so they don't get confused about where they can and cannot live? Post it on the City website maybe?
Relax. No one called white people choosing to live in "transitioning" neighborhoods "a**holes." We need to be able to talk about the real effects of institutionalized and systematic racism without people taking things so personally.
Gentrification is what it is. It's obviously an uncomfortable reality for people with empathy. We need to be able to talk about its real effects on the lives of the poor, and what solutions might exist to alleviate the problems it causes to poor people settled in their communities being broken apart by outside capitalist forces.
And we need to be able to do it without white people throwing a hissy-fit at how inconvenienced they are by the fact that their presence (and the investment that follows them) often turns poor people effectively into refugees.
leeharveyawesome wrote:Hey white people get hip to this- according to some on this forum if you're white and you choose to live in Ballwin you're an anti-urban probable racist who doesn't want to live around black people. But if you choose to live in, say, Fountain Park or even around Cherokee you're an a**hole who's driving out the black people.
Your other options are places like San Diego or Portland or Austin (or even Kansas City!) where you're free to live wherever you want without all the bullsh*t.
Can someone please come up with a reliable list to make it easier for any prospective St. Louis resident's so they don't get confused about where they can and cannot live? Post it on the City website maybe?
Relax. No one called white people choosing to live in "transitioning" neighborhoods "a**holes." We need to be able to talk about the real effects of institutionalized and systematic racism without people taking things so personally.
Gentrification is what it is. It's obviously an uncomfortable reality for people with empathy. We need to be able to talk about its real effects on the lives of the poor, and what solutions might exist to alleviate the problems it causes to poor people settled in their communities being broken apart by outside capitalist forces.
And we need to be able to do it without white people throwing a hissy-fit at how inconvenienced they are by the fact that their presence (and the investment that follows them) often turns poor people effectively into refugees.
Fair enough. Thanks for your reply. Have a great day.
I don't know where to start on this back and forth. I'm speechless. All I'll say is back in the late 60's Wrigleyville was a run-down neighborhood. Gentrification's force took hold in the mid-70's and look at it now. Are there people on this site that would argue against that kind of neighborhood transformation?
sirshankalot wrote:All I'll say is back in the late 60's Wrigleyville was a run-down neighborhood. Gentrification's force took hold in the mid-70's and look at it now. Are there people that would argue against that kind of neighborhood transformation?
If it were possible, a constructive exercise might be to ask that question to the people who lived there before.
^ As I said the goal should be to increase the population of all races in the city.... I hope I'm wrong, but you seem to be in support of actively shipping black people out of centrally-located neighborhoods.
I'm in support of less lopsided regional demographics because I think it would massively advance regional cooperation. If gentrification reduces the black population in a neighborhood, then so be it, and don't worry so much as long as it settles in around the regional average. And bonus if it reduces the concentration of poverty and increases the concentration of knowledge workers. Also, to echo sirshanksalot's comments on Wrigleyville - that.
^ if blacks were moving out of centrally located neighborhoods into areas of equal or greater opportunity then great, but that doesn't seem to be the case in general.
sirshankalot, I can't speak for others, but for me what I want to see especially in our central neighborhoods is more investments that bring more people, density, diversity and opportunity. Taking Terry Kennedy's ward for example, I think both the North Sarah Apartments (some rehab but mostly new construction) and Freedom's Place (rehab for vets) are in his ward and are exactly the type of projects in the central city that we need along with market-rate oriented projects.
^ to try to bring this back to the start of the conversation, I think we can't begin to reach our potential until we make good progress in relations between the police and black community. Last night's embarrassing events were a setback on that front for sure.
^ As I said the goal should be to increase the population of all races in the city.... I hope I'm wrong, but you seem to be in support of actively shipping black people out of centrally-located neighborhoods.
I'm in support of less lopsided regional demographics because I think it would massively advance regional cooperation. If gentrification reduces the black population in a neighborhood, then so be it, and don't worry so much as long as it settles in around the regional average. And bonus if it reduces the concentration of poverty and increases the concentration of knowledge workers. Also, to echo sirshanksalot's comments on Wrigleyville - that.
To reduce the concentration of poverty IS to reduce the concentration of black people in St. Louis. That is why this is all happening. Race and class correlate especially strongly in metro St. Louis. I'd argue that it IS the shifting racial, and thus class, geography of the metro that is at the heart of the 'Ferguson Insurgency.' This is happening because white people and corporate interests are increasingly entering the central corridor and poor blacks quite literally feel 'pushed around.' That is, pushed northward. Just as central St. Louis is offering more, they are unceremoniously pushed northward and when they get there they are threatened and taken advantage of by the ruling groups of Ferguson, Jennings, and north county. This is all happening BECAUSE of change, NOT because ST. Louis is somehow stuck and unchanging. Regional cooperation would help this all happen in more orderly and humane ways, the these changes are too powerful to stop. Resisting them isn't a choice.
MatthewHall wrote: To reduce the concentration of poverty IS to reduce the concentration of black people in St. Louis. That is why this is all happening. Race and class correlate especially strongly in metro St. Louis. I'd argue that it IS the shifting racial, and thus class, geography of the metro that is at the heart of the 'Ferguson Insurgency.' This is happening because white people and corporate interests are increasingly entering the central corridor and poor blacks quite literally feel 'pushed around.' That is, pushed northward. Just as central St. Louis is offering more, they are unceremoniously pushed northward and when they get there they are threatened and taken advantage of by the ruling groups of Ferguson, Jennings, and north county. This is all happening BECAUSE of change, NOT because ST. Louis is somehow stuck and unchanging. Regional cooperation would help this all happen in more orderly and humane ways, the these changes are too powerful to stop. Resisting them isn't a choice.
Is that really what's going on though? I'm hearing two narratives a lot lately. One is what you've articulated, and the other is that black people are are leaving the City for the same reasons white people left the city a generation ago--newer housing, safer neighborhoods, better schools, etc., which would mean that they're mostly leaving from North City, not the Central Corridor. I'm more inclined to believe the latter, and since most white people forget that the north side even exists, I'm not sure that I'd characterize that as being "pushed" out.
"most white people forget that the north side even exists, I'm not sure that I'd characterize that as being "pushed" out."
It's crazy but I find this statement to be a major part of the problem here in St Louis. I've been a frequent visitor of the board for years and it seems nobody is a bit interested in the development or overall success of the north side. Whenever something positive is posted about development in north city the thread is ignored. We have tons of work to do if we ever plan to compete with more liberal minded cities.
MatthewHall wrote: To reduce the concentration of poverty IS to reduce the concentration of black people in St. Louis. That is why this is all happening. Race and class correlate especially strongly in metro St. Louis. I'd argue that it IS the shifting racial, and thus class, geography of the metro that is at the heart of the 'Ferguson Insurgency.' This is happening because white people and corporate interests are increasingly entering the central corridor and poor blacks quite literally feel 'pushed around.' That is, pushed northward. Just as central St. Louis is offering more, they are unceremoniously pushed northward and when they get there they are threatened and taken advantage of by the ruling groups of Ferguson, Jennings, and north county. This is all happening BECAUSE of change, NOT because ST. Louis is somehow stuck and unchanging. Regional cooperation would help this all happen in more orderly and humane ways, the these changes are too powerful to stop. Resisting them isn't a choice.
Is that really what's going on though? I'm hearing two narratives a lot lately. One is what you've articulated, and the other is that black people are are leaving the City for the same reasons white people left the city a generation ago--newer housing, safer neighborhoods, better schools, etc., which would mean that they're mostly leaving from North City, not the Central Corridor. I'm more inclined to believe the latter, and since most white people forget that the north side even exists, I'm not sure that I'd
characterize that as being "pushed" out.
Whether it's push or pull is purely a matter of perspective. Are people leaving crime and poverty or going to peace and prosperty? It's really two sides of the same coin, two sides of the same narrative. The poorest move northward from the central corridor (this is largely finished now). This pushes those slightly better off in areas just to the north to move northward to escape those who are even worse off than them moving in from the south. This creates a third wave of displacement still further north were the working class moves to escape the poor, but largely non-criminal who have increasingly entered their area from the south. The movement northward of the working class in turn pushes into genuinely middle-class areas and spills over into north county and you get Ferguson. Each push causes the next in the chain of pushes. Each causes those in one position to be pushed, or pulled if you prefer, to an area further north. It's all one dynamic. St. Louis' problems are truly metropolitan ones.
^We all know the north side exists. I make it a point to take different routes through the northside whenever it's on the way somewhere else. The near north side and the areas around O Fallon Park are really nice and screaming for revitalization. It breaks my heart, as in almost makes me cry, to see the dereliction of so much fine craftsmanship in the architecture of the north side. I may have a fondness for wood bungalows, but to see a hundred year old house I know had nice woodwork and brick details caving on itself is so profoundly depressing, as is the sheer stupidity of this city's social history that led to the current situation. I think the point that's often missed, is that we all want a beautiful, successful city. We don't want to see its urbanity destroyed through negligence or blighting and whatever Home Depot inspired garbage passes for redevelopment in far too many cases. For better or worse, much of NSL is struggling or very poor, and as a result has limited resources to invest in itself, at least to the high level much of north city was built to, and the region isn't going to do much to help a black population because the region is revoltingly stupid and backward on basically all social justice and urban form matters. The flip side of that is that if any significant investment is to occur - the kind of investment that will keep those areas urban in character, it is most likely going to come from new residents with a lot more $$$$ in hand to do it, and odds are most of those new residents will not be black, because that's where the money is. That's a really longwinded way of saying that the future of NSL, or at least the future in which it is not psychotic and desperate, probably involves a drastically different demographic balance. And people like Kennedy, who live in some odd timewarp of 60s race politics, don't help.
Onecity, I'm trying to wrap my head around your comment. That's not easy. It sort of sounds like you're saying there's no future in N City working with the existing residents because they're too poor.
Meanwhile, what should be done about Roorda? The StL Post Dispatch says he's unfit for office.
Your frowny face is warranted. Too poor to maintain the standard of design and construction, and not likely to have meaningful assistance from the region because of lingering race stuff. It's a pretty awesome recipe. Also it was pretty stupid for Roorda to wear a Wilson support bracelet given the nature of the meeting. However, you know my prerequisite for being an official or employee of the City of Saint Louis is to either not have been born and raised here, or to have spent a large number of formative years living in a functional, 21st century city, so I say fire everyone and replace them all with transplant and replants that have experienced non-loathing city life elsewhere, aldermen included.
Some are saying crime in the city is up 300% (don't know where they get that info). And others are saying arrests are down 44% (don't know where they get that number, either.)
But in the Post Dispatch, Roorda is saying that if the city creates a COB, the police will stop arresting people in the act of committing crimes, and will only respond to police calls. His words, "no officer wants to be the next Darren Wilson".
Roorda is saying that people supporting the COB don't support the police. Yet the bill for COB has wide support in the Board of Aldermen and from the Mayor.
Roorda and the police officers union is out of control. They don't want to answer to anyone, least of all the people of STL city.
I wonder where Roorda lives? More and more police are living outside the city limits, so they are not our neighbors and they cannot vote.
The concession to end the residency requirement for the police department was a mistake, but shows the strength of the police officers union in St. Louis.
CORRECTION - In previous comments I might have noted that Jeff Roorda is the president of the police officers' association. That is incorrect. His title is business manager. That sounds like a paid position, not an elected one. The business manager of a union is sometimes in slang described as the "union boss". I don't know if there is a separate president or governing board of the police officers' association. If there are, it would be interesting to hear whether that board or president supports the actions of Roorda, especially his shouting down of Alderman Terry Kennedy in the aldermanic committee meeting.
^ Roorda is a long-time (life-long?) resident of the Great County of Jefferson. I don't believe he has ever been employed by the Saint Louis police department. He is much like the union leader of the NYPD who has caused a huge rift within the union for attacking Mayor DeBlasio in outlandish terms and other theatrics. As in NYC, rank and file here are going to have to take a good look at whether they are getting forceful, effective advocacy or are being taken down the wrong road by a shouting flame-thrower.
OnStar hits the kill switch after man reports to Alton police an armed carjacking; the car crashes near N. Broadway. Hopefully we'll see fewer of these crimes as more tech enables such responses. Same thing with stealing smart phones.
It would be cool if we had tech where you could hit a glitter switch, where a thief would have an explosion of sticky glitter all over themselves. Of course, if gary kreie's dreamworld of self-driving cars ever happens the stolen car could lock doors and drive the thief directly to jail.
roger wyoming II wrote:Of course, if gary kreie's dreamworld of self-driving cars ever happens the stolen car could lock doors and drive the thief directly to jail.
That's going to be a really amusing transition period.
I do wonder about the consequences of becoming a society where you can't even be a thief without a degree in computer science.
