9,566
Life MemberLife Member
9,566

PostJan 04, 2020#126

Take away- biz leaders sent southwest a packet of how much their companies spent with SW in what I assume was to get SW to no longer back the process?



“Two St. Louis executives skeptical of the Lambert airport privatization process met with a top Southwest Airlines leader days before Mayor Lyda Krewson ended it, according to three people familiar with the matter.

Andy Taylor, executive chairman of privately held rental car giant Enterprise Holdings, and David Kemper, executive chairman of Commerce Bancshares, traveled to Dallas for the Dec. 16 meeting with Southwest President Tom Nealon, the people said.


Southwest, the largest carrier at Lambert, is based in Dallas. It and other Lambert airlines agreed to a preliminary framework for privatization before the city, in October, issued a request for qualifications to firms interested in operating Lambert. Southwest would have an outsized say in whether Lambert is operated by a private company because of Federal Aviation Administration rules giving airlines veto power over any deal.

Kemper, in a statement, said the Dec. 16 meeting "was a continuation of a series of meetings the business community has had with Southwest Airlines over the last several years on how the business community can work with major stakeholders to improve air service at Lambert."

The Business Journal reported on Monday that Taylor and Kemper, plus Ameren CEO Warner Baxter, raised concerns with Krewson prior to her ending the privatization effort on Dec. 20. Civic Progress and the Regional Business Council, organizations made up of area CEOs, also said they raised concerns with the city and offered to pay for a study of alternatives to privatizing Lambert, which they said must still be improved. Baxter and Kemper are Civic Progress members.


But the new information makes clear that St. Louis' corporate community had also opened a dialogue with Southwest.

On Nov. 26, Regional Business Council Executive Director Kathy Osborn sent a note about Lambert privatization to her organization's members. In it, she said the topic was "of key interest to the St. Louis business community," and that "Southwest Airlines has a strong voice in this process and their importance to the future health of St. Louis Lambert International Airport is critical."

"A few of the region's key business leaders are in dialogue with Southwest regarding the proposed privatization," Osborn wrote.

"Therefore," she added, "we have a special request — we would like to ask you to provide us with your company's total annual spending with Southwest Airlines."

Osborn wrote that the information, which was due to her by Dec. 6, "will help the business community demonstrate to Southwest how important we are to the process."

Melissa Lackey, spokeswoman for the RBC and Civic Progress, declined to comment.

A Southwest Airlines spokesman had no immediate comment.

Some of the companies hoping to lease Lambert and the city's privatization advisers had advocated changes to the airport's rental car facilities. Enterprise is a tenant.

An Enterprise Holdings spokeswoman, Sara Miller, said, "I would not have comment on any specific meetings."

She added,

"However, I would reinforce what Andy previously said. His focus has always been on advocating for the long-term success of the St. Louis region, which includes ensuring we have a thriving airport. He, like many others, had expressed his desire to see an enhanced process to evaluate all potential opportunities for the airport, including privatization, before any final decision was made. He looks forward to working with the Mayor and other leaders to determine the best path forward."
A spokesman for Krewson emphasized that the decision to end the privatization process was hers alone, and that local executives are free to communicate with Lambert's airlines and other stakeholders. She also previously cited a lack of buy-in from the business community and city residents, and some continued skepticism of privatization from Lambert's airlines, as reasons for ending the privatization effort.

5,705
Life MemberLife Member
5,705

PostJan 04, 2020#127

^ Thanks 

A take away is how everyone wants to see a thriving airport but really don't see a long term plan or vision in terms of decades on what that means in terms of actually improvements from the airport, city or business leaders whether it consolidated rental facility, or more on airport parking, and so on.   I don't advocate new terminals as you see with New Orleans or KC as of late as Terminal 1 & 2 seem right but the current A,B,C & D concourse configuration seems like a big waste of valuable real estate in the long term.  Another way to put it, I wonder what HOK or any national design/architect firm could have done with a piece of the pie in terms of massing studies & rendered options (where could you put a Consolidated Car facility, where could you put more parking, so on?) on money already spent ..     

71
New MemberNew Member
71

PostJan 04, 2020#128

I'm glad privatization fell through, but if these CEOs want the city to stop lurching from one bad quick fix to the next, then maybe more of them ought to think about investing in the city, maybe relocate an HQ downtown or something. Until the city is more confident in its coffers, which will involve substantial white collar job growth, it will fall prey to grifters and hucksters like Sinquefield who promise a big pay-out in return for stripping of major assets.

PostJan 04, 2020#129

dbInSouthCity wrote:
Dec 23, 2019
JacksonPolyp wrote:
Dec 23, 2019
leeharveyawesome wrote:
Dec 22, 2019
It seems a little fishy that less than 48 hours after the African American group gets on board with privatization all of a sudden the Mayor thnks it's a bad idea.
I don't really think this is fishy in the sense that it makes the Krewson admin look racist, but it does remind me of a thought I had today - that part of the motivation for pulling the plug on airport privatization is Krewson wanting to do a power play and say f*** you to the north city aldermen who thought they had a big payday for their wards coming with privatization - maybe payback for holding up her BoF nominees? I'm not sure, though, as it's not clear to me that Krewson isn't just superficially upset that the BoF process is stalled.
I know elected officials here are petty but they're not petty to pass on $2,000,000,000 because someone didnt approve their people to a Board that isnt going to do anything.    

Civic Progress and RBC + polling at 70% against was the one and only factor.
I just read that the NAACP is looking into suing the parties involved in tanking privatization efforts for "tortious interference," with the additional dismissal of any other suggested approach as not lending itself to leverage by north city aldermen. Clearly, the city's black leaders feel they were targeted directly by this decision, regardless of what Krewson's actual motivations were. More and more it seems that St. Louis's black leadership is intent on standing in the way of regional cooperation because they see every regional effort as an affront to north city.

6,123
Life MemberLife Member
6,123

PostJan 05, 2020#130

I think you are referring to this recent P-D article: Future of St. Louis airport may be regional? I was googling NAACP St. Louis airport privatization and that's all I could find; a brief passing mention towards the end of that article. (Which is a very good article, by the way.) 

Doesn't really say what legal action the NAACP might pursue or against whom, precisely. Nor is the NAACP representative of all African American leadership in the St. Louis region. Comptroller Green, for instance, is easily one of the most influential African American politicians in the area, and she was also one of the biggest critics of the privatization effort. But Pruitt's basic point, that this process needs to support not only the city but its neediest residents, is fairly reasonable. (No need to further subsidize those already at the top. You want to make the place better? Raise the bottom.) 

Anyway, I think it might be prudent to dismiss the broad generalizations unless we care to concede an organization like the Jefferson County Chamber of Commerce is representative of the entire local Anglo-American polity. And I for one don't much like that idea.

9,566
Life MemberLife Member
9,566

PostJan 05, 2020#131

there are also 2 naacp, the county and the city. And they’re not always on the same page

71
New MemberNew Member
71

PostJan 05, 2020#132

symphonicpoet wrote:
Jan 05, 2020
I think you are referring to this recent P-D article: Future of St. Louis airport may be regional? I was googling NAACP St. Louis airport privatization and that's all I could find; a brief passing mention towards the end of that article. (Which is a very good article, by the way.) 

Doesn't really say what legal action the NAACP might pursue or against whom, precisely. Nor is the NAACP representative of all African American leadership in the St. Louis region. Comptroller Green, for instance, is easily one of the most influential African American politicians in the area, and she was also one of the biggest critics of the privatization effort. But Pruitt's basic point, that this process needs to support not only the city but its neediest residents, is fairly reasonable. (No need to further subsidize those already at the top. You want to make the place better? Raise the bottom.) 

Anyway, I think it might be prudent to dismiss the broad generalizations unless we care to concede an organization like the Jefferson County Chamber of Commerce is representative of the entire local Anglo-American polity. And I for one don't much like that idea.
Yes, that's the one. All I'm saying is it seems very unusual that the NAACP is mulling legal action over the termination of this privatization process. It doesn't really seem to be an issue in their wheelhouse, until you scope out a bit and think about recent manifestations of racial politics in the city, the Krewson administration's relationship with black leadership, etc. I think the racial politics of the airport privatization process are complicated, but they do exist and they have been underreported; in addition to bearing a resemblance to other recent instances of the city's black political leadership's resistance to regional cooperative efforts.

4,553
Life MemberLife Member
4,553

PostJan 05, 2020#133

For some of those reasons you describe it’d be hard for any plaintiff (whatever their race) to establish standing to bring such a case.

9,566
Life MemberLife Member
9,566

PostJan 05, 2020#134

JacksonPolyp wrote:
Jan 05, 2020
symphonicpoet wrote:
Jan 05, 2020
I think you are referring to this recent P-D article: Future of St. Louis airport may be regional? I was googling NAACP St. Louis airport privatization and that's all I could find; a brief passing mention towards the end of that article. (Which is a very good article, by the way.) 

Doesn't really say what legal action the NAACP might pursue or against whom, precisely. Nor is the NAACP representative of all African American leadership in the St. Louis region. Comptroller Green, for instance, is easily one of the most influential African American politicians in the area, and she was also one of the biggest critics of the privatization effort. But Pruitt's basic point, that this process needs to support not only the city but its neediest residents, is fairly reasonable. (No need to further subsidize those already at the top. You want to make the place better? Raise the bottom.) 

Anyway, I think it might be prudent to dismiss the broad generalizations unless we care to concede an organization like the Jefferson County Chamber of Commerce is representative of the entire local Anglo-American polity. And I for one don't much like that idea.
Yes, that's the one. All I'm saying is it seems very unusual that the NAACP is mulling legal action over the termination of this privatization process. It doesn't really seem to be an issue in their wheelhouse, until you scope out a bit and think about recent manifestations of racial politics in the city, the Krewson administration's relationship with black leadership, etc. I think the racial politics of the airport privatization process are complicated, but they do exist and they have been underreported; in addition to bearing a resemblance to other recent instances of the city's black political leadership's resistance to regional cooperative efforts.
Is it complicated because NAACP and black political leadership have been on opposite ends of the two recent efforts, the airport and better together. Both opposed by black electeds and supported by NAACP

123
Junior MemberJunior Member
123

PostJan 06, 2020#135

The airport desperately needs a consolidated car rental facility.
Having the rental car companies scattered here and there is absolutely ridiculous.
Only airport I know of that has the situation we have at Lambert.

7,810
Life MemberLife Member
7,810

PostJan 06, 2020#136

Rooster wrote:
Jan 06, 2020
The airport desperately needs a consolidated car rental facility.
Having the rental car companies scattered here and there is absolutely ridiculous.
Only airport I know of that has the situation we have at Lambert.
St. Louis without one is a dying breed but we are not the only one. What about JFK, LaGuardia, LAX? O Hare didn't get one until last year.

But yeah. it's a sad state.

4,553
Life MemberLife Member
4,553

PostJan 06, 2020#137

Detroit car rentals are scattered around. It doesn’t seem that uncommon.

9,566
Life MemberLife Member
9,566

PostJan 06, 2020#138

wabash wrote:
Jan 06, 2020
Detroit car rentals are scattered around. It doesn’t seem that uncommon.
My favorite is Texarkana airport- you land, you walk into the terminal and take 50
more steps and you’re at your rental car.

2,929
Life MemberLife Member
2,929

PostJan 06, 2020#139

STL Biz Journal: New effort emerges to keep Lambert privatization alive

STL City's chapter of the NAACP is joined with the STL-KC Carpenters Regional Council in asking for prospective investment companies to submit their privatization bids. The NAACP sees what's possible with a large cash infusion into the City's coffers to work on urban blight (and education and crime); the Carpenters see jobs for their members and enhancement of the regional business community. They've also submitted open-records requests for the meetings on privatization held behind closed doors. 

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostJan 07, 2020#140


2,689
Life MemberLife Member
2,689

PostJan 07, 2020#141

I can’t believe Bond went straight to suggesting a privatized airport would allow the city to repeal the earnings tax.

Rex just won’t stop.

sc4mayor
sc4mayor

PostJan 07, 2020#142

^ Why do you think King Rex gifted them $150,000? Bond is bought and paid for. He’s just trying to further pad his pockets.

123
Junior MemberJunior Member
123

PostJan 07, 2020#143

Just think of all the abandon buildings that could have been torn down, streets repaired, schools improved if Rex would have used the money on that instead of spending
 it trying to  eliminate the earnings tax.
As far as I know he has given no solution to replace the funds if the earnings tax is eliminated.

788
Super MemberSuper Member
788

PostJan 07, 2020#144

Rooster wrote:
Jan 07, 2020
Just think of all the abandon buildings that could have been torn down, streets repaired, schools improved if Rex would have used the money on that instead of spending
 it trying to  eliminate the earnings tax.
As far as I know he has given no solution to replace the funds if the earnings tax is eliminated.
I think he is trying to make changes that will lead to improvements in the way the city is governed and ultimately that'll be worth a lot more than he is spending. I don't know his business dealings so I could be wrong but assume that he doesn't have much to gain personally from removing the earnings tax. 

In a way I agree that I would like to see some things fixed up in the way the city works before they get handed a bunch of money.

71
New MemberNew Member
71

PostJan 07, 2020#145

flipz wrote:
Jan 07, 2020
I don't know his business dealings so I could be wrong but assume that he doesn't have much to gain personally from removing the earnings tax. 
You should learn more about how much he's worth and how capital gains are taxed as income. Because he's a city resident, 1% of whatever he's reporting as income from his investments to the IRS is payable to the city. That's why he hates the tax and wants it repealed.

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostJan 07, 2020#146

^Rex is a billionaire who could live anywhere he wants. The earnings tax means nothing to him; if it did, he could simply move a couple of miles west. 

I find it interesting how some people just can't believe that Rex loves STL, and genuinely wants to make it a better place. He may have different ideas about how to achieve that, but that's all he's after. 

535
Senior MemberSenior Member
535

PostJan 07, 2020#147

framer wrote:
Jan 07, 2020
^Rex is a billionaire who could live anywhere he wants. The earnings tax means nothing to him; if it did, he could simply move a couple of miles west. 

I find it interesting how some people just can't believe that Rex loves STL, and genuinely wants to make it a better place. He may have different ideas about how to achieve that, but that's all he's after. 
Exactly. We live is such a silly world with everyone removed 2 degrees by screens that big personalities have lost all humanity. Everything is a conspiracy theory these days....#bummer

2,929
Life MemberLife Member
2,929

PostJan 07, 2020#148

JacksonPolyp wrote:
Jan 07, 2020
flipz wrote:
Jan 07, 2020
I don't know his business dealings so I could be wrong but assume that he doesn't have much to gain personally from removing the earnings tax. 
You should learn more about how much he's worth and how capital gains are taxed as income. Because he's a city resident, 1% of whatever he's reporting as income from his investments to the IRS is payable to the city. That's why he hates the tax and wants it repealed.
Then again, he owns more than one residence. Perhaps he recognizes his non-STL City residence for tax purposes, which is fully his right. Then again, noting how he made his fortune creating the Index Fund, perhaps he recognizes enough income from other sources of revenue wherein he doesn't recognize much for annual capital gains, preferring to reinvest profits. Hell, he could be living off of a reserve of gold coins in his basement like John Wick. In the end, we don't know. As neither of us are his accountant or comparable representative for managing his finances, I think it's a little much to presume his full tax rates. 

That all stated, I certainly don't think he's spending tens of millions of dollars to see if he can scrimp by paying a little less in earnings income to the City based off of his long-term capital gains. 

We are way off topic.

9,566
Life MemberLife Member
9,566

PostJan 07, 2020#149

JacksonPolyp wrote:
Jan 07, 2020
flipz wrote:
Jan 07, 2020
I don't know his business dealings so I could be wrong but assume that he doesn't have much to gain personally from removing the earnings tax. 
You should learn more about how much he's worth and how capital gains are taxed as income. Because he's a city resident, 1% of whatever he's reporting as income from his investments to the IRS is payable to the city. That's why he hates the tax and wants it repealed.
He is retired and based in Westphalia Missouri, outside of Jefferson City.    He thinks E tax is blocking growth in the City, without much evidence. 

PostJan 07, 2020#150

framer wrote:
Jan 07, 2020
^Rex is a billionaire who could live anywhere he wants. The earnings tax means nothing to him; if it did, he could simply move a couple of miles west. 

I find it interesting how some people just can't believe that Rex loves STL, and genuinely wants to make it a better place. He may have different ideas about how to achieve that, but that's all he's after. 
That is true, and his ideas were implemented in Kansas and it nearly bankrupt  the state.  They had to repeal most of the tax cuts and when the voters got a chance to way in they elected a Democrat governor. 

Read more posts (107 remaining)