Very disheartening. The ZMD scandals aren't helping either.

Any prognostications on the County Executive primary race? Looks like it may be a close one. Are there any major differences between the two on urbanism issues? I think I saw Stenger said he'd change the name of the Highways Department to Transportation Department but I don't know his overall stance on bike/ped/transit. The Highways Department needs a major attitude adjustment.

This County Executive race has been rather amusing.

It's hard for me to say who I would vote for, considering it doesn't exactly impact me, but I think Dooley is going to have some problems against Stream come November, whereas Stenger will defeat him without much effort.

Stream has already come out against the City-County merger. Does anyone think Stenger will be more open to it, or maintain the "trust but verified" quasi denial.

Stenger was good about not just roads transpiration efforts yesterday on kMOX.
http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/07/29/ ... krikorian/

The county's poor list of Amendment 7 projects shows that either they are Dooley's priorities or he didn't exercise any leadership on it and just went along with what the County Highway Dept wanted. Not good in either case.

Dooley has been much better about City/County, etc wish I had the audio of his speech at the SLU symposium back in Feb. He has been understandably more reserved on the topic as the election approaches.

I'll be voting for Stenger.

I know its not a City election or issues technically but I wish Next stl or some other urbanist site would endorse a candidate, based on, things like Transportation, density, and city county reunification.

^ I disagree... This site has always been about City and region boosting, developments, events, news , etc.... I do not think it is necessary for anyone to start bringing politics into the equation. I'm sure political affiliations and beliefs vary on this site. I do not think we want to alienate or push away any new or current members, by pushing a political agenda. It's okay to have an opinion, but for the site to come out and officially endorse any candidate, could cause people to start labeling the site as having an agenda. I have never thought of this site having any kind of political agenda. Obviously, members express their views, but for the site to endorse someone, not a good idea. It's just
St. Louisans talking St. Louis happenings.
Not that anybody asked, but that's my two cents on that topic ....

^ Yes, I am aware of the great split.... However, just to make sure he wasn't referring to this site, I responded.

PS_ I would label this as "some other urbanist site"

debaliviere wrote:I'll be voting for Stenger.

And why is that?

^^Are you advocating a merger or the entities joining together under one name, but staying separate?

I know... I know... bad City-County merger joke...

Charlie spoke at the MO Public Transit Assoication yesterday, seemed up beat....John Nations introduced him as the savior of tranit in the St.Louis region, sounded like a campagin intro speech...

I did not think that Stenger would blow Dooley away this badly.

Now that the (DEM) County Executive race is over, does anyone have any insight on the following:
-Will Slay reach out to Stenger (this is all assuming he wins in NOV)
-Will City-County merger talks resume (in reality, City joining as muni talk)
-Do Stenger and Slay have any past interactions
-Will we see Stenger and Slay making announcements regarding regional issues or was that a Dooley-Slay thing?

I know that Stenger has always taken a wait and see approach, waiting to analyze the outcome of the various research being conducted. His stand is not nearly as strong as Dooley's. I wonder where this process goes from here and whether it regresses or progresses under Stenger. Obviously, Stream could upset Stenger and "merger" talk will die, but that is not likely, based upon the landslide victory Stenger won last night.

I ask any political insiders to either make an educated guess or speak from factual info you may have. Obviously, I know nothing, other that what has been said to the public.

Thanks!

^ I hadn't heard that he has "unequivocally supported" reentry, but that is encouraging if true.

I thought the most we've heard out of Stenger was dancing around the question saying he can't have a stance until there's a proposal on the table.

But perhaps that was his safe approach as the election neared. Maybe he said he supported re-entry in the past?