urbanSTL

We jinxed the lack of murders a while ago. 5 murders since Sunday. Weather gets warm, thugs do harm.

April 2024 had 14 murders, 53 YTD. So I'm pretty sure we are still pacing below last year, even for April. Crime increases during the warm weather months every year, so the slight week over week or month over month increase is baked in already.

Auggie wrote:Doesn't appear that the administration is planning to support it lol. Spencer never had any solid answer about a lawsuit during the campaign and STILL doesn't even after she's been mayor for a week.

The Jones/Green side have firmly been on the "fight" side regarding state takeover for years. This isn't new or unexpected, Spencer should be more transparent about what she wants to do and should have had a plan by now. It's either yes or no.

The legal fight simply isn't that important to City Hall it seems, for whatever reason.

Not playing Green’s timeline isn’t lack of transparency. The point is, the lawsuit didn’t have to be filed without the alignment of the Mayors office. The timing was intentional and it’s becoming clear that Green is sliding into a place of troublemaker.

I also wouldn’t disparage Spencer if she felt the lawsuit was a waste of resources. She has many times the legal resources I have. I certainly don’t agree with the law but if the case was so strong, why is KC still state controlled?

Lying down for the cousin humpers in Jefferson City is always the wrong decision. Very early terrible look for Spencer.

JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Lying down for the cousin humpers in Jefferson City is always the wrong decision. Very early terrible look for Spencer.

BAHAHAHA you guys are going to bend yourselves in every direction to criticize Spencer. All under a (false) claim that Jones was severely prosecuted.

At first it was her staff picks were too old, then a non-critical social media account not switching hands within 48 hours, then it was replacing the corrupt arrangement of board and ceo at SLDC (something every mayor is entitled to do), now it’s a political lawsuit she neither filed nor discussed publicly.

JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Lying down for the cousin humpers in Jefferson City is always the wrong decision. Very early terrible look for Spencer.

I think your jumping the gun a bit here. Spencer could oppose the state takeover (she does), and still be correct that the current lawsuit is a waste of resources. I mean does anyone have any indication that lawsuit had any chance of being successful?

Does she oppose the state takeover? My recollection is that she’s been rather non-committal on the subject. And given she just killed the only suit that could have gotten the takeover enjoined before it happens suggests she’s still, at best, non-committal.

JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Does she oppose the state takeover? My recollection is that she’s been rather non-committal on the subject. And given she just killed the only suit that could have gotten the takeover enjoined before it happens suggests she’s still, at best, non-committal.

I don’t think there is any ambiguity on where Cara stands. When taking questions from the media after her inaugural address she said:

“I really support local control of our police.”

It’s fine to offer platitudes but I’ve heard nothing from her to suggest she’s going to earnestly fight the dentistry skeptics in Jefferson City on this

Everything I’ve gathered from Spencer politically is that she morally opposes state control but tends to defer to reality over morality. She very well could receive legal guidance that it’s not likely or worth the $$ AND political advice that starting her administrations Missouri relationship with a lawsuit is not wise.

Just asking, would you take a 5% shot if it meant Missouri republicans were going to dig in harder too. This might be done but earnings tax isn’t.

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2025

Auggie wrote:Doesn't appear that the administration is planning to support it lol. Spencer never had any solid answer about a lawsuit during the campaign and STILL doesn't even after she's been mayor for a week.

The Jones/Green side have firmly been on the "fight" side regarding state takeover for years. This isn't new or unexpected, Spencer should be more transparent about what she wants to do and should have had a plan by now. It's either yes or no.

The legal fight simply isn't that important to City Hall it seems, for whatever reason.

. I certainly don’t agree with the law but if the case was so strong, why is KC still state controlled?

its not the same law, and KC was established over 150 years ago. Law for KC says nothing about their elected officials not being able to be critical of the Board 

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2025

Auggie wrote:Doesn't appear that the administration is planning to support it lol. Spencer never had any solid answer about a lawsuit during the campaign and STILL doesn't even after she's been mayor for a week.

The Jones/Green side have firmly been on the "fight" side regarding state takeover for years. This isn't new or unexpected, Spencer should be more transparent about what she wants to do and should have had a plan by now. It's either yes or no.

The legal fight simply isn't that important to City Hall it seems, for whatever reason.

Not playing Green’s timeline isn’t lack of transparency. The point is, the lawsuit didn’t have to be filed without the alignment of the Mayors office. The timing was intentional and it’s becoming clear that Green is sliding into a place of troublemaker.

I also wouldn’t disparage Spencer if she felt the lawsuit was a waste of resources. She has many times the legal resources I have. I certainly don’t agree with the law but if the case was so strong, why is KC still state controlled?

I'm promise you that I'm not trying to play "gotcha" with Spencer. I'm not Jive or Baltimore looking to b**** about every little thing.

I just think Spener should have had a clear yes or no plan by now if she plans on carrying out a lawsuit or not. She was wishy washy about it in the campaign and still doesn't have a clear yes or no a week in.

The timing was intentional because Green knew Spencer was wishy washy on the issue and probably wanted to get free political points. I don't like Green and I've criticized her on here before. But it was entirely avoidable if Spencer had put together a clear plan for carrying out a lawsuit or not.

I also think spending any amount of money on a lawsuit would be worth it in the effort of removing the 25% on police budget mandate from the city. That's the biggest part that will have the most detrimental affects on the city, especially Spencer's campaign promises to improve the city's services. She needs money to do that, and being forced to spend $40M more on police is absolutely not gonna help her achieve her goals.

The case isn't that bad (not necessarily likely) for a federal judge to find the budget requirement illegal. The lawsuit claims that the city's first amendment right to express itself in its budget (I'm pretty sure that's their argument) was being violated. Any chance to save the city from having to spend $40M more per year on police should probably be taken, regardless of the relatively marginal cost.

Things aren't made illegal until they're challenged. Why KC didn't challenge, I can't tell you. Maybe in part because they wouldn't be put in quite as dire of a fiscal position of the city is, probably my best guess.

Edit: It's also worth mentioning that the initial lawsuit named the State of Missouri as opposed to the Governor or Attorney General, which is why the judge initially sent it back to the city to prove why they can sue the state. It's difficult to sue a state, not difficult to sue the enforcer of laws, such as the Governor or Attorney General. It probably would have moved forward with those changes.

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2025

JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Lying down for the cousin humpers in Jefferson City is always the wrong decision. Very early terrible look for Spencer.

I think your jumping the gun a bit here. Spencer could oppose the state takeover (she does), and still be correct that the current lawsuit is a waste of resources. I mean does anyone have any indication that lawsuit had any chance of being successful?

Very unlikely that a judge would block the entire law, not totally unlikely that a judge would find the 25% budget requirement illegal.

5% chance that it would be blocked entirely

35% chance that the budget requirement would be blocked

I don't think it's a waste or resources to have a not impossible chance of saving the city from the 25% budget requirement.

The judge assigned to the case already filed a memorandum last week that said “that the case would be dismissed unless Green's attorneys can explain why they should be able to sue a sovereign entity.”

They also only had 4 business days to respond to that before it was dismissed.

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2025

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2025

I think your jumping the gun a bit here. Spencer could oppose the state takeover (she does), and still be correct that the current lawsuit is a waste of resources. I mean does anyone have any indication that lawsuit had any chance of being successful?

Very unlikely that a judge would block the entire law, not totally unlikely that a judge would find the 25% budget requirement illegal.

5% chance that it would be blocked entirely

35% chance that the budget requirement would be blocked

I don't think it's a waste or resources to have a not impossible chance of saving the city from the 25% budget requirement.

The judge assigned to the case already filed a memorandum last week that said “that the case would be dismissed unless Green's attorneys can explain why they should be able to sue a sovereign entity.”

They also only had 4 business days to respond to that before it was dismissed.

^see my edit

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2025

Auggie wrote: Very unlikely that a judge would block the entire law, not totally unlikely that a judge would find the 25% budget requirement illegal.

5% chance that it would be blocked entirely

35% chance that the budget requirement would be blocked

I don't think it's a waste or resources to have a not impossible chance of saving the city from the 25% budget requirement.

The judge assigned to the case already filed a memorandum last week that said “that the case would be dismissed unless Green's attorneys can explain why they should be able to sue a sovereign entity.”

They also only had 4 business days to respond to that before it was dismissed.

^see my edit

Where are you coming up with those % chances and how do you know those chances wouldn’t be higher under a different approach by Spencer?

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2025

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2025

The judge assigned to the case already filed a memorandum last week that said “that the case would be dismissed unless Green's attorneys can explain why they should be able to sue a sovereign entity.”

They also only had 4 business days to respond to that before it was dismissed.

^see my edit

Where are you coming up with those % chances and how do you know those chances wouldn’t be higher under a different approach by Spencer?

Just my general knowledge of the law and what I've heard about the lawsuit. I am not any more familiar than you or anyone else is with the specifics of the lawsuit, just what I've read in media.

The chances may be higher under a Spencer approach, maybe focused entirely on the budget requirement, but I simply don't know because she hasn't revealed any type of plan, which is my core criticism.

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2025

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2025

Auggie wrote:Doesn't appear that the administration is planning to support it lol. Spencer never had any solid answer about a lawsuit during the campaign and STILL doesn't even after she's been mayor for a week.

The Jones/Green side have firmly been on the "fight" side regarding state takeover for years. This isn't new or unexpected, Spencer should be more transparent about what she wants to do and should have had a plan by now. It's either yes or no.

The legal fight simply isn't that important to City Hall it seems, for whatever reason.

. I certainly don’t agree with the law but if the case was so strong, why is KC still state controlled?

its not the same law, and KC was established over 150 years ago. Law for KC says nothing about their elected officials not being able to be critical of the Board 

Seems like pretty obvious prior restraint which is illegal and violates the first amendment.

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2025

Auggie wrote: ^see my edit

Where are you coming up with those % chances and how do you know those chances wouldn’t be higher under a different approach by Spencer?

Just my general knowledge of the law and what I've heard about the lawsuit. I am not any more familiar than you or anyone else is with the specifics of the lawsuit, just what I've read in media.

The chances may be higher under a Spencer approach, maybe focused entirely on the budget requirement, but I simply don't know because she hasn't revealed any type of plan, which is my core criticism.

Ok. I don’t know that you or I are terribly qualified to give an opinion on the chance of success of Green’s lawsuit.

I do agree that it will be important to see Cara’s plan, but the fact that Jones/Green filed this the day before Spencer took office does make it difficult for Spencer to have a fully fleshed out plan on day 1.

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2025

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2025

Where are you coming up with those % chances and how do you know those chances wouldn’t be higher under a different approach by Spencer?

Just my general knowledge of the law and what I've heard about the lawsuit. I am not any more familiar than you or anyone else is with the specifics of the lawsuit, just what I've read in media.

The chances may be higher under a Spencer approach, maybe focused entirely on the budget requirement, but I simply don't know because she hasn't revealed any type of plan, which is my core criticism.

Ok. I don’t know that you or I are terribly qualified to give an opinion on the chance of success of Green’s lawsuit.

I do agree that it will be important to see Cara’s plan, but the fact that Jones/Green filed this the day before Spencer took office does make it difficult for Spencer to have a fully fleshed out plan on day 1.

I would say there's a better chance of success in state court than federal court, since I federal courts don't typically interpret state constitutions unless it's regarding the US constitution.

I still disagree. She reasonably could have had a plan of her own on day 1, regardless of what Green or Jones did. She's the mayor, all she would have to do is say "I appreciate the work done by the previous administration and President Green, but this is my plan and this is what the city will be attempting to carry out." If she reached out to Green and Green rejected, then that's on Green and she should have gone forward without her. If she didn't reach out, then that's kinda on her but she still could have put together a plan without her.

Drivers like enforcement of other drivers. If they think it might be themselves being held accountable,

Auggie wrote: ↑

Apr 25, 2025

Maryland Heights Police getting ripped a new one in the FB comments. Brings light to the Catch 22 that police in this region face. They implement and use tools to better enforce traffic laws, and people b****. They stop stringintly enforcing traffic laws, and people b****. It's just a lose-lose for them.

Why we don't use drones to "chase" fleeing vehicles is beyond me.

we worry about brazen motor bike riders
is this next? https://ktla.com/news/local-news/swarm-of-teens-physically-verbally-harass-couple-loot-southern-california-ralphs/