“Disinformation is the brainchild of a self-absorbed behavior.”
― Mohith Agadi
― Mohith Agadi
- 9,545
From my longer Twitter post.
There are no winners today at the Board of Aldermen—just 15 losers.
Last week, during the HUDZ meeting, I testified in support of the compromise bill between Alderwoman Sonnier and Alderwoman Boyd, combining aspects of their respective proposals. I feel conflicted about including Alderwoman Sonnier among the 15 losers because she was the only one who demonstrated leadership, flexibility, and hard work toward crafting a bill that addresses many needs without spreading the money too thin. While Alderwoman Boyd also worked on a compromise, her position seemed to flip-flop four times in a single week. Leaders
must be clear on where they stand, and people need to trust that stance.
During my testimony, I pointed out that we are fortunate to have $300 million in unrestricted funds alongside a long list of necessary improvements. Most cities only have the long list and struggle to fund even a fraction of it.
The compromise bill still has the backing of the business community, led by Greater St. Louis Inc., as well as the Mayor’s office. The Board needs to put aside pettiness and electoral politics, get back to work, and pass this bill on Tuesday—finalizing it by Friday. The residents of this city deserve a functioning Board, nothing less. In Jeff City, despite a supermajority in both chambers, the party in control is a governing disaster. We can and must do better locally.
This compromise bill is focused enough to make a meaningful impact across all key categories—categories that city residents have asked to be funded. Our water system is self-sustaining and remains one of our greatest assets. Meanwhile, citywide infrastructure is long past its useful life. This funding, along with major investments from ARPA—thanks to the administration’s leadership—will go a long way toward bringing it back to a state of good repair.
This region has one downtown, and it will always have one downtown. It is already seeing significant investments: the Jefferson Arms building, the AT&T Tower, the Millennium Hotel site, and extensive projects by AHM in Downtown West. Now, it’s the city’s turn to do its part—continuing this momentum by funding downtown projects that seamlessly connect these developments and destinations, incentivizing further growth, and ensuring the redevelopment of the Railway Exchange Building, the last remaining large vacant structure.
To accomplish all this, we need city employees—another 1,000 of them. I wish we led the nation in offering the highest salaries, but the process is far more complicated than simply saying we’ll use this money for raises. While that may not be an option, we can lead the country by providing top-tier benefits: childcare stipends, college education funds, and homebuyer assistance. These benefits are already common at institutions like WUSTL and are increasingly becoming the norm in the private sector. Let’s
lead the way in the public sector
Alders who are hesitant about these programs should have more confidence in city employees’ ability to implement them. After all, these are the same employees responsible for executing water projects, infrastructure improvements, and everything else this funding will support.
Less politics. More work.
There are no winners today at the Board of Aldermen—just 15 losers.
Last week, during the HUDZ meeting, I testified in support of the compromise bill between Alderwoman Sonnier and Alderwoman Boyd, combining aspects of their respective proposals. I feel conflicted about including Alderwoman Sonnier among the 15 losers because she was the only one who demonstrated leadership, flexibility, and hard work toward crafting a bill that addresses many needs without spreading the money too thin. While Alderwoman Boyd also worked on a compromise, her position seemed to flip-flop four times in a single week. Leaders
must be clear on where they stand, and people need to trust that stance.
During my testimony, I pointed out that we are fortunate to have $300 million in unrestricted funds alongside a long list of necessary improvements. Most cities only have the long list and struggle to fund even a fraction of it.
The compromise bill still has the backing of the business community, led by Greater St. Louis Inc., as well as the Mayor’s office. The Board needs to put aside pettiness and electoral politics, get back to work, and pass this bill on Tuesday—finalizing it by Friday. The residents of this city deserve a functioning Board, nothing less. In Jeff City, despite a supermajority in both chambers, the party in control is a governing disaster. We can and must do better locally.
This compromise bill is focused enough to make a meaningful impact across all key categories—categories that city residents have asked to be funded. Our water system is self-sustaining and remains one of our greatest assets. Meanwhile, citywide infrastructure is long past its useful life. This funding, along with major investments from ARPA—thanks to the administration’s leadership—will go a long way toward bringing it back to a state of good repair.
This region has one downtown, and it will always have one downtown. It is already seeing significant investments: the Jefferson Arms building, the AT&T Tower, the Millennium Hotel site, and extensive projects by AHM in Downtown West. Now, it’s the city’s turn to do its part—continuing this momentum by funding downtown projects that seamlessly connect these developments and destinations, incentivizing further growth, and ensuring the redevelopment of the Railway Exchange Building, the last remaining large vacant structure.
To accomplish all this, we need city employees—another 1,000 of them. I wish we led the nation in offering the highest salaries, but the process is far more complicated than simply saying we’ll use this money for raises. While that may not be an option, we can lead the country by providing top-tier benefits: childcare stipends, college education funds, and homebuyer assistance. These benefits are already common at institutions like WUSTL and are increasingly becoming the norm in the private sector. Let’s
lead the way in the public sector
Alders who are hesitant about these programs should have more confidence in city employees’ ability to implement them. After all, these are the same employees responsible for executing water projects, infrastructure improvements, and everything else this funding will support.
Less politics. More work.
- 2,430
Correct. As even the Oxford Dictionary definition suggests, there can be specific intent to deceive but it is not a necessary element. It can be said that Denis is misinformed of the meaning of misinformation if he insists that there has be intentional deceit.Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑Jan 31, 2025That’s not accurate. It doesn’t really matter, but if you want to use those two terms correctly, what I’ve shared is the difference. Misinformation is irregardless of intent. Disinformation is with the intent to deceive.
I'm with you. I think there can be a balance between allocating dollars to certain core needs where $$ can be spent relatively quickly while setting a good chunk of money aside for future decisions.quincunx wrote: ↑Jan 30, 2025It's probably wise to hold back ~half until at least 2027 given the chaos in DC and Jeff City.
- 924
If this would be the case, someone please give me the reason not to commit $100M to downtown. The alders absolutely should fight Green in chipping away at downtowns portion if this is on the table
- 9,545
^ that bill doesnt exist in that form, there is no bill 131 CS
Listen; it’s far easier to admit you were wrong, as I did with my 1 year mistake than twist yourself in some bizarre pretzel where you’re arguing that the Oxford dictionary is wrong but I can see why that’s more preferred than trying to make a case that SLPS offers a program that it doesn’tSTLrainbow wrote: ↑Feb 01, 2025Correct. As even the Oxford Dictionary definition suggests, there can be specific intent to deceive but it is not a necessary element. It can be said that Denis is misinformed of the meaning of misinformation if he insists that there has be intentional deceit.Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑Jan 31, 2025That’s not accurate. It doesn’t really matter, but if you want to use those two terms correctly, what I’ve shared is the difference. Misinformation is irregardless of intent. Disinformation is with the intent to deceive.
- 2,430
I haven't said anything about SLPS other than correcting your misinformed statement that it does not offer pre-K 3. It is good for the public to know that SLPS provides this service. And as I said before I haven't looked at the childcare fund too much; however, if it includes funding for 3 year olds then there is overlap with the population that SLPS offers. If it is 0-2 then there is none. Whether or not there is any overlap seems pertinent to me and I'd be more supportive of the fund if it's limited to 0-2.
Also, fwiw here's the more common understanding of misinformation from Merriam-Webster. And here's an interesting piece from the APA
on the differences between misinformation and disinformation.
Also, fwiw here's the more common understanding of misinformation from Merriam-Webster. And here's an interesting piece from the APA
on the differences between misinformation and disinformation.
- 951
“The only difference between being uninformed and misinformed is that one is your choice and the other is theirs.”
― Frank Sonnenberg, Listen to Your Conscience: That's Why You Have One
― Frank Sonnenberg, Listen to Your Conscience: That's Why You Have One
There is 1 loser. Her name is Megan Ellyia Green. She is consistent in putting her self-interests ahead of her constituents. We can only hope that these episodes are enough to sway votes to whomever runs against her when her term is up.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Feb 01, 2025From my longer Twitter post.
There are no winners today at the Board of Aldermen—just 15 losers.
Last week, during the HUDZ meeting, I testified in support of the compromise bill between Alderwoman Sonnier and Alderwoman Boyd, combining aspects of their respective proposals. I feel conflicted about including Alderwoman Sonnier among the 15 losers because she was the only one who demonstrated leadership, flexibility, and hard work toward crafting a bill that addresses many needs without spreading the money too thin. While Alderwoman Boyd also worked on a compromise, her position seemed to flip-flop four times in a single week. Leaders
must be clear on where they stand, and people need to trust that stance.
During my testimony, I pointed out that we are fortunate to have $300 million in unrestricted funds alongside a long list of necessary improvements. Most cities only have the long list and struggle to fund even a fraction of it.
The compromise bill still has the backing of the business community, led by Greater St. Louis Inc., as well as the Mayor’s office. The Board needs to put aside pettiness and electoral politics, get back to work, and pass this bill on Tuesday—finalizing it by Friday. The residents of this city deserve a functioning Board, nothing less. In Jeff City, despite a supermajority in both chambers, the party in control is a governing disaster. We can and must do better locally.
This compromise bill is focused enough to make a meaningful impact across all key categories—categories that city residents have asked to be funded. Our water system is self-sustaining and remains one of our greatest assets. Meanwhile, citywide infrastructure is long past its useful life. This funding, along with major investments from ARPA—thanks to the administration’s leadership—will go a long way toward bringing it back to a state of good repair.
This region has one downtown, and it will always have one downtown. It is already seeing significant investments: the Jefferson Arms building, the AT&T Tower, the Millennium Hotel site, and extensive projects by AHM in Downtown West. Now, it’s the city’s turn to do its part—continuing this momentum by funding downtown projects that seamlessly connect these developments and destinations, incentivizing further growth, and ensuring the redevelopment of the Railway Exchange Building, the last remaining large vacant structure.
To accomplish all this, we need city employees—another 1,000 of them. I wish we led the nation in offering the highest salaries, but the process is far more complicated than simply saying we’ll use this money for raises. While that may not be an option, we can lead the country by providing top-tier benefits: childcare stipends, college education funds, and homebuyer assistance. These benefits are already common at institutions like WUSTL and are increasingly becoming the norm in the private sector. Let’s
lead the way in the public sector
Alders who are hesitant about these programs should have more confidence in city employees’ ability to implement them. After all, these are the same employees responsible for executing water projects, infrastructure improvements, and everything else this funding will support.
Less politics. More work.
- 9,545
It’s all 15. And I donate to alot of them. The water only stunt was dumb, they said they had 8 votes. Mayor would have vetoed water only bill, you need 10 votes to override it and there wasn’t even time left in a session to override until May. That derailed the entire debate on 153 cs
They’re all losing control of the public’s perception of the process. Shouldn’t have brought the bill to the board if the votes and political support weren’t there.
It’ll still get done, just with less buy-in than before. Everything before was “the process” but happening now it’s political dysfunction.
Green was just politically outplayed by Volmer. Bet she’s happy it’s not 2027.
It’ll still get done, just with less buy-in than before. Everything before was “the process” but happening now it’s political dysfunction.
Green was just politically outplayed by Volmer. Bet she’s happy it’s not 2027.
Talking about this on 101.1 FM now with Jacob Kirn, this guy is such a doom and gloomer while saying it's not all doom and gloom for STL. Never brings up anything positive.
Bill is likely dead until after the election. This is great news. Alders should take a step back.
$26M over 24 months. STL makes $1M a month for doing nothing.
Isn't inflation eating that up? And there's the opportunity cost of the ROI of what they might have done with it. It's not like replacing water pipes is going to get cheaper.
Yes. Construction inflation far exceeds treasury returnsquincunx wrote:Isn't inflation eating that up? And there's the opportunity cost of the ROI of what they might have done with it. It's not like replacing water pipes is going to get cheaper.
^ no, it does not far exceed the interest returns. It exceeds at times.
Water projects are good in my book. Go ahead. Everything else should be stopped until after the local election and until we have more clarity on Trump Admin plans.
Today’s board meeting was almost a disaster. “Building the plane while it’s on the runway” is the best way to describe it. Disturbing that elected adults found it appropriate to just throw out random dollar amounts based on feelings.
Water projects are good in my book. Go ahead. Everything else should be stopped until after the local election and until we have more clarity on Trump Admin plans.
Today’s board meeting was almost a disaster. “Building the plane while it’s on the runway” is the best way to describe it. Disturbing that elected adults found it appropriate to just throw out random dollar amounts based on feelings.
My original view from a couple years ago was that the entire thing should be put towards the north-south MetroLink as that would give the city the largest ROI out of anything.
The compromise was pretty good all things considered. No clue what Green was thinking with her shenanigans.
The compromise was pretty good all things considered. No clue what Green was thinking with her shenanigans.
She wants to be the queen whose orders are not questioned.Auggie wrote: ↑Feb 04, 2025My original view from a couple years ago was that the entire thing should be put towards the north-south MetroLink as that would give the city the largest ROI out of anything.
The compromise was pretty good all things considered. No clue what Green was thinking with her shenanigans.
Over the time period, construction inflation has outpaced CPI-U inflation and also any municipal or federal financial products the city is allowed to invest in.addxb2 wrote:^ no, it does not far exceed the interest returns. It exceeds at times.
Water projects are good in my book. Go ahead. Everything else should be stopped until after the local election and until we have more clarity on Trump Admin plans.
Today’s board meeting was almost a disaster. “Building the plane while it’s on the runway” is the best way to describe it. Disturbing that elected adults found it appropriate to just throw out random dollar amounts based on feelings.
^ over this one period of time which included hyper-inflation, yes.
By 2033 this money is worth $458MM.
I’m not authentically suggesting this but there is something to be said for financial stability. Creditors would certainly take notice if the city locked this money up, improving credit rating, lowering cost of taking debt for all projects.
By 2033 this money is worth $458MM.
I’m not authentically suggesting this but there is something to be said for financial stability. Creditors would certainly take notice if the city locked this money up, improving credit rating, lowering cost of taking debt for all projects.
So does this simply come down to Greene wanting complete control over the money? And because she's not getting her way she's throwing her tantrums.
I thought that until yesterday. Yesterday made very clear there is only weak support for any of the proposals outside of water. Maybe Green helped push, but bill sponsors never should’ve brought the bills forward. Votes weren’t there.dweebe wrote:So does this simply come down to Greene wanting complete control over the money? And because she's not getting her way she's throwing her tantrums.