STLhistoryBuff wrote:Sharon Tyus is pure scum. I can't believe the racist sh*t she was spewing. "Let's reduce the aldermen, but keep all the black aldermen and get rid of all of the white aldermen". Disgusting.
STLhistoryBuff wrote:Sharon Tyus is pure scum. I can't believe the racist sh*t she was spewing. "Let's reduce the aldermen, but keep all the black aldermen and get rid of all of the white aldermen". Disgusting.
100% agree with STLhistoryBuff, jbacott, rencelas. Everyone reaches their limit and this appears to be it. Watched nearly all of the BoA debate and feel both disgusted and more concerning, hopeless. There's no hope. Even if bill is vetoed this won't be the end. We have until 2020/21 -- plenty of time for more politics (lawsuits...?)
It is so much easier to move than to deal with this dysfunction.
Over and over and over again it is stated on this site that the ultimate end-game is some type of regional government. Fragmentation was cited as an issue in Ferguson report, etc. It isn't a cure-all but a merger and reduction in municipalities would be huge step in the right direct.
Whats happening with BoA is microcosm of what will need to play out all over the region in next ___ years (decades)?
How the heck is this becoming a "white vs. black" debate?! Absolutely terrible that progress can't be made with open discussions as to implement the reduction before racism is used as a reason to redo a vote. Echoing the sentiments of many here, we're extremely close to giving up on St. Louis and heading for greener pastures.
Reached out to my Alderwoman, Tammika Hubbard, yesterday. I had some choice words for her, which admittedly were a little harsh, but I stand by it. Anyways, I got a reply today.
Alderwoman <thub4ward5@aol.com>
11:53 AM (4 hours ago)
to me
Spoken like a true Devil! I will never vote in favor of taking equal representation away from those that look like me! Get Over IT!
If you would like context to her reply, here is my original email to Tammika Hubbard.
I am your constituent. I'm appalled by the Board of Aldermen's behavior regarding ward reduction. We voted overwhelmingly to reduce the number of Alderman. I saw that you were in favor of keeping the same amount of Alderman. You're gone. I don't care who runs opposite you. I am voting against you until you are out of office. You are obviously not fit for office. How are city leaders going to say that the County needs to reduce, but won't do the same in the city??
Does this have another vote before it goes to the Mayor? If so, I'd say email Lewis Reed and Lyda Krewson to tell them you're opposed to this bill to reverse City voters' decision to reduce the Board of Alderman. Tell Reed you will vote against him next spring if he supports Board Bill 25.
Assuming you’re being sarcastic considering the picture you posted earlier, but there shouldn’t be another vote period. The people already voted in 2012
Does this have another vote before it goes to the Mayor? If so, I'd say email Lewis Reed and Lyda Krewson to tell them you're opposed to this bill to reverse City voters' decision to reduce the Board of Alderman. Tell Reed you will vote against him next spring if he supports Board Bill 25.
The bill still needs to be third read, signed by Reed, and then sent to Krewson for approval.
Assuming you’re being sarcastic considering the picture you posted earlier, but there shouldn’t be another vote period. The people already voted in 2012
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Only sarcastic with the white devil comment.
The primary opposition is coming from black north city alderman, correct? Yet they are pushing a voter suppression tactic that will effect black voter turnout more than white voter turnout.
Lol I thought so. Yeah, I don’t know though. I’m thinking it’s just a last ditch effort and they’re grasping at straws.
I am probably missing the joke, but why the EU flags? For all the demonization it gets by US press, it is still a far more functional and accountable institution than any local government in Missouri.
Yesterday afternoon, @LydaKrewson tweeted her opposition to the ward reduction bill not long after my column (http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/colu ... 3d2e9.html ) posted. I asked if that meant she would veto the bill if it passes. The answer is yes, according to spokesman @KoranAddo. She will veto.
Yesterday afternoon, @LydaKrewson tweeted her opposition to the ward reduction bill not long after my column (http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/colu ... 3d2e9.html ) posted. I asked if that meant she would veto the bill if it passes. The answer is yes, according to spokesman @KoranAddo. She will veto.
I wonder if vetoing the bill will just be a larger distraction in the sense that now, the proponents will be looking for ways to override the veto.
I wonder if vetoing the bill will just be a larger distraction in the sense that now, the proponents will be looking for ways to override the veto.
i'd much rather the proponents have to to secure another 4 BOA votes on top of getting over 60% of the public vote. makes their bullsh*t much less likely to succeed. hopefully after this re-vote effort fails, the reduction happens, and the sky does not fall on A-A representation, they'll go away.
The bill's supporters definitely will not have the votes to override Krewson's veto. All of this was extremely performative for certain individuals on the board.
I wonder if vetoing the bill will just be a larger distraction in the sense that now, the proponents will be looking for ways to override the veto.
i'd much rather the proponents have to to secure another 4 BOA votes on top of getting over 60% of the public vote. makes their bullsh*t much less likely to succeed. hopefully after this re-vote effort fails, the reduction happens, and the sky does not fall on A-A representation, they'll go away.
Sounds like a distraction from real issues they could be addressing.
I wonder if vetoing the bill will just be a larger distraction in the sense that now, the proponents will be looking for ways to override the veto.
i'd much rather the proponents have to to secure another 4 BOA votes on top of getting over 60% of the public vote. makes their bullsh*t much less likely to succeed. hopefully after this re-vote effort fails, the reduction happens, and the sky does not fall on A-A representation, they'll go away.
Sounds like a distraction from real issues they could be addressing.
doesn't take much effort for the mayor to veto a bill. and if a subset of aldermen chooses to continue wasting everyone's time opposing reduction instead of working on the issues they complain are not being addressed, then that irony/hypocrisy is on them. moreover, reduction is itself a "real issue" and an important enough "distraction" that i encourage the mayor and pro-reduction BOA members to spend whatever time they need addressing it.
BB25 (ward reduction re-do) was not debated today. It was put on ice; 3 "yes" votes from last week were not present 2day. When this happens to BBs, support tends to vacillate. Bwt this & the Mayor's statement she will Veto BB25...a redo getting on ballot appears unlikely.
