^ But isn't that the problem? I mean the people at Great Rivers Greenway and CityArchRiver don't have the money they want either and they're going to ask voters to give them a few hundred million. Why not something like this, or a little less, for downtown? Why not a larger CID? There are options if it were a priority. It's not.
This isn't really directed at you, pat, but your statement reminded me of something.And they don't
There is no they. It makes me crazy when people talk about "they." "They" don't do this. "They" aren't looking at the problem the right way. There is us or we - everyone who lives in and has a stake in the future success of this region. Deferring to "they" is just another way of being powerless and impotent to shape our world.
- 11K
^ it's also convenient because much of the time we don't know who to blame/address, who's making decisions
When I say "they", it means STL City government. And as it stands, they don't have funds to do more work. If you want to be idealistic and say that involves all of us, then we're just as responsible as those who we've elected.
Now, I have no problem raising sales taxes similar what CityArchRiver proposes. In fact, I agree with you guys and was thinking something along those lines would be great. Call it a "Beautification Bill". Put the SLDC in charge of it and have it goes specifically towards beautification projects. Street scapes, parking garage facades, urban art work, etc.
But you're problem isn't convincing me, its convincing 330,000 people.
Now I don't know what the number figure would be as far as funds needed and percentage of taxes to raise. Have any idea of how much sales tax revenue is generated by the city each year? And I think this should just be a city tax. Leave STL County out of it.
Now, I have no problem raising sales taxes similar what CityArchRiver proposes. In fact, I agree with you guys and was thinking something along those lines would be great. Call it a "Beautification Bill". Put the SLDC in charge of it and have it goes specifically towards beautification projects. Street scapes, parking garage facades, urban art work, etc.
But you're problem isn't convincing me, its convincing 330,000 people.
Now I don't know what the number figure would be as far as funds needed and percentage of taxes to raise. Have any idea of how much sales tax revenue is generated by the city each year? And I think this should just be a city tax. Leave STL County out of it.
- 2,929
Have to back Pat on this one. We don't have the money for luxuries right now, and I can't anticipate the City's voters saying "yes" towards another Downtown beautification program that doesn't involve the Gateway Arch (and maybe not there, either) until we have a broader economic turnaround, both locally and nationally. I would very much like to see Locust, Olive, and Pine experience beautification programs, both in Downtown and Downtown West, but I just don't see it as economically feasible right now.
Voters, by contrast, would rather seek out new City debt if it was for services, such as education or police. Getting funding for NorthSide Regeneration and BPV will have much more priority where real estate developments are concerned.
Onecity does have the right idea on making such a project funded by ancillary developments and the regional population, both businesses and citizens. However, seeking corporations based in, say, 1010 Market or 1 Metropolitan Square to fund street beautification projects along Locust could be detrimental towards attracting new businesses to Downtown. Maybe a special redevelopment fund could be created for such projects based on the local district's taxing authority that would not be prohibitive by nature, but that's another conversation entirely.
And I don't want the City to just release debt. We've already fought hard to maintain our investment-grade status for City-issued debt, and I don't want to see that put at risk of downgrade. Anyways, look at how municipal bonds nationally are now being questioned for how they analyze risk: http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ti ... 13097.html. This could be significant...
In the interim, let's look to how the rebuilt & extended Tucker will be full of new traffic after the New Mississippi River Bridge is completed. With that new inflow of traffic, we can expect to see both an increase in City revenues (from new business taxes derived ancillary to the Bridge's opening) and resulting increases in gross traffic in Downtown. From here, we can return to seeking further beautification efforts.
Voters, by contrast, would rather seek out new City debt if it was for services, such as education or police. Getting funding for NorthSide Regeneration and BPV will have much more priority where real estate developments are concerned.
Onecity does have the right idea on making such a project funded by ancillary developments and the regional population, both businesses and citizens. However, seeking corporations based in, say, 1010 Market or 1 Metropolitan Square to fund street beautification projects along Locust could be detrimental towards attracting new businesses to Downtown. Maybe a special redevelopment fund could be created for such projects based on the local district's taxing authority that would not be prohibitive by nature, but that's another conversation entirely.
And I don't want the City to just release debt. We've already fought hard to maintain our investment-grade status for City-issued debt, and I don't want to see that put at risk of downgrade. Anyways, look at how municipal bonds nationally are now being questioned for how they analyze risk: http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ti ... 13097.html. This could be significant...
In the interim, let's look to how the rebuilt & extended Tucker will be full of new traffic after the New Mississippi River Bridge is completed. With that new inflow of traffic, we can expect to see both an increase in City revenues (from new business taxes derived ancillary to the Bridge's opening) and resulting increases in gross traffic in Downtown. From here, we can return to seeking further beautification efforts.
- 11K
^ good perspective, but I'm routinely surprised to hear that residents won't approve a tax increase for anything other than the Arch, or maybe Great Rivers Greenway (or both). Frankly, the idea of other improvements hasn't be developed and supported by local politicians, philanthropists, or anyone. In that vacuum steps people who say "parks are the key to urban development", "we should pay $200M to revamp a National Park", etc. Our leaders underestimate voters - see Metro Prop A vote. We can do more than we think.
I did a little math, and a small sales tax increase may not be too tough to stomach for something like beautification. Although it may be a pointless try in lieu of our safety and education issues as GC pointed out.
Sales tax revenue for the City was reported as 45,188,000 for 2011. That was generally the same each year if not a bit higher going back to 2007. The city sales tax rate is 8.491%. After going through the math, if we somehow passed a .25% increase for "beautification" that would equate to about $1.3 million per year. That gives you a sales tax rate of 8.741%. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
Match that with federal or state money and you could get a street scape improvement every couple years. Or you could do 2 or 3 large urban art pieces per year.
Put a five year sunset on it to lower the percentage or eliminate it entirely once we start running out of space to beautify.
Sales tax revenue for the City was reported as 45,188,000 for 2011. That was generally the same each year if not a bit higher going back to 2007. The city sales tax rate is 8.491%. After going through the math, if we somehow passed a .25% increase for "beautification" that would equate to about $1.3 million per year. That gives you a sales tax rate of 8.741%. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
Match that with federal or state money and you could get a street scape improvement every couple years. Or you could do 2 or 3 large urban art pieces per year.
Put a five year sunset on it to lower the percentage or eliminate it entirely once we start running out of space to beautify.
That's all the sales tax 8.5% generated? Seems like a trickle, and it only appears to represent per-resident spending of $1700. Is that correct? That's only equivalent to $35 a week in groceries - per person. What is and isn't taxed?
See this link to a break down of city revenue and specifically the sales tax. Specifically look at pages 19 and 23.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/52432412/Earn ... -Phase-Out
Half of the sales tax goes to the state and the board of education.
The sales tax is on retail sales and is only about 10% of the City's General Revenue Fund.
I think the benefit of increasing sales tax for funding what we've been talking about is the fact that this encourages more people to come to the city. That's more people spending money here and in turn increases the amount of revenue from sales tax.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/52432412/Earn ... -Phase-Out
Half of the sales tax goes to the state and the board of education.
The sales tax is on retail sales and is only about 10% of the City's General Revenue Fund.
I think the benefit of increasing sales tax for funding what we've been talking about is the fact that this encourages more people to come to the city. That's more people spending money here and in turn increases the amount of revenue from sales tax.
- 11K
Groceries aren't typically taxed (candy bars, etc. are). Anyway, why would this be pointless to try "in lieu of our safety and education issues"? Again, we're constantly asked to increase sales tax for CIDs, other local districts...and we're going to be asked to do so for the Arch grounds and Great Rivers Greenway - the discussion in the community should be A) do we want our sales tax increased and B) for what purpose? Yes, the parks/private orgs have taken the initiative to move forward - that's partially due a lack of local political leadership. The looming tax votes do not necessarily reflect the needs or wants of the community.
Also, the base city sales tax rate is 8.491%, but add on CID and other taxes and sales tax is near 12% is many areas of the city.
Also, the base city sales tax rate is 8.491%, but add on CID and other taxes and sales tax is near 12% is many areas of the city.
^I said it may be pointless. I can't really say what the feelings are of the entire city, just my own.
So..
A)I don't mind a slight increase in sales taxes if
B)that sales tax increase is used to fund some sort of beautification bill.
Disregarding everything with the current Arch Grounds/GRG tax proposal, do you think this is worth going towards?
Do you think many in the city would go for it? Do you any aldermen would sponsor it or take it on?
I feel like this is something viable and worthwhile, but would like to know if others feel the same way.
So..
A)I don't mind a slight increase in sales taxes if
B)that sales tax increase is used to fund some sort of beautification bill.
Disregarding everything with the current Arch Grounds/GRG tax proposal, do you think this is worth going towards?
Do you think many in the city would go for it? Do you any aldermen would sponsor it or take it on?
I feel like this is something viable and worthwhile, but would like to know if others feel the same way.
- 2,929
If you're serious about this, and you can find some financial backers, you should start with a constituent survey on what people want to see and whether they'd consider voting for it. Get the outside numbers to validate your arguments.
Say you do get positive numbers worth pursuing this: that's when you can get strong support from politicians, who would be willing to put their name behind something after seeing the poll numbers look good. Not all, but many. Until then, look to which politicians represent these areas, i.e. Aldermen, House Reps, State Senate, and get their early interests. Seek out support from NGOs like the Downtown Partnership (but watch out, some groups may think you're trying to muscle in on their territory). Good luck
Say you do get positive numbers worth pursuing this: that's when you can get strong support from politicians, who would be willing to put their name behind something after seeing the poll numbers look good. Not all, but many. Until then, look to which politicians represent these areas, i.e. Aldermen, House Reps, State Senate, and get their early interests. Seek out support from NGOs like the Downtown Partnership (but watch out, some groups may think you're trying to muscle in on their territory). Good luck
- 1,218
Does anyone know when the movie theater plans to open? According to the MX website, it simply states 2012:
I hope to take in a movie here over the Christmas break!The plans for MX Movies have been finalized and will offer a total of 326 seats in three digital theaters. MX Movies, opening in 2012, has been designed to provide an enhanced in-theater dining experience, with generous and comfortable seating offering the first in-seat ordering technology in St. Louis.
I e-mailed them a couple of days ago. They said it was taking them longer than expected and they hoped to open in mid-December.
- 11K
^ Don't have a date, but they're testing Android-based ordering tablets. I posted a pic on the nextSTL Twitter account last night.
![]()
Any signs of life for the new cinema?
I'll be in town for the holidays and would love to catch a flick if they're open.
I'll be in town for the holidays and would love to catch a flick if they're open.
- 516
I heard they were going to open when the Hobbit is released in a couple weeks.wabash wrote:Any signs of life for the new cinema?
I'll be in town for the holidays and would love to catch a flick if they're open.
http://www.stlouiscinemas.com/MX/ComingSoon.aspx
It says what's coming soon, but can't buy tickets. I would think in the next week or two by the looks of it
It says what's coming soon, but can't buy tickets. I would think in the next week or two by the looks of it
Thanks for the info!
Under the Hobbit listing it says: The precious journey begins December 14th!
Perhaps that's an allusion to opening night.
Under the Hobbit listing it says: The precious journey begins December 14th!
Perhaps that's an allusion to opening night.
- 8,155
^ I hear Pie is offering a Hobbit pizza for the occasion. Seriously though, anyone made it down to the Collective for some shopping?
How about OPO Plaza? Oh wait...debaliviere wrote:Being familiar with Cincinnati, you've probably seen the giant video screen on the roof of the Macy's building overlooking Fountain Square. It shows movies, Reds games and other programming, and people bring lawn chairs and sit out and watch. Something like that would be perfect for a Kiener garage.Alex Ihnen wrote:I suddenly really like the idea of putting a semi-permanent outdoor movie theater on top of a Kiener garage for the summer. Awesome views, parking, deck is sloped... Yes, this is a good idea.
-RBBMercantile Exchange
@TheMXSTL
RT @MackBradley Getting closer...It's looking like a movie theater! http://4sq.com/TAGftq @MX_Movies #STL
- 1,642
Yes, it's very nice in there with a great mix of items. I got something from Alternative Apparel which is some very cool stuff and not too expensive. Kinda like American Apparel but better, imho.roger wyoming II wrote:^ I hear Pie is offering a Hobbit pizza for the occasion. Seriously though, anyone made it down to the Collective for some shopping?
There's also Isle of Man from Chicago, very cool. There's like 30+ vendors in there so there's a lot to browse.
The whole MX development is such a huuuuuge step for downtown.
- 1,218
The Snarf's Sandwich shop build out appears to be coming along quite nicely right next to Pi.
- 10K
Indeed. I'm kind of surprised it's taking so long though!Mark Groth wrote:The Snarf's Sandwich shop build out appears to be coming along quite nicely right next to Pi.