Fifty-Two Years a St. Louisan

19 07 2018

Downtown West

Lawrence O’Toole, currently a light bird on the SLPD, who served as acting chief in the recent interregnum between Dotson and Kojak, is alleging discrimination in the process that wound up selecting Kojak but in which he was a finalist.

It’s as if he just started living here a few years ago, and hasn’t lived here for all 52 years of his life, save possible brief exceptions for this that or the other.

By now, he should know the time of day.

Since Bob Scheetz’s retirement, the lay of the land when it comes to SLPD Chief has been that it alternates every other one between black and white.  That and that alone was a clue that Dotson’s successor was going to be black.  But the other reason we knew it would be black is because this is the first chief transition since Ferguson and the Ferguson Effect around here.

If I knew this, then O’Toole knew this.

To the extent his complaint will be successfully resolved in his favor, it will involve nothing more than Lyda stuffing a few money rolls in his mouth to shut him up.

Advertisements




The St. Louis Way

19 07 2018

Downtown

If last current year in St. Louis is any indication, I already know how City Hall will solve this problem.

Money that was destined in the city budget for the SLPD will somehow be mysteriously diverted to the trash/refuse department.  Because the SLPD will suddenly be facing a budget shortfall, City Hall will ask the voters for either a property or sales tax increase or a little of both, because cops.  The vote yes media buys will show you a bunch of good clean cut diverse cops, and disturbing unsettling dark images suggestive of black violent crime in the background.

And we all know how it will turn out.





Day of Wreck-oning

24 05 2018

Downtown

2:

New proposal to allow City Alderman to review Mayor Krewson appointments

A new proposal will be introduced to the St. Louis City Board of Aldermen Thursday which would force Mayor Lyda Krewson to get approval from the board for all appointments to city boards and commissions. Sources tell Fox 2, this move is in response to the mayor’s support of ward reduction.

In 2012, voters approved a plan to cut the number of city wards from 28 to 14. This would also eliminate the number of Board of Alderman positions. The plan is set to take effect in 2022.

Several aldermen are supporting a bill asking voters to reverse that decision in hopes of saving their jobs. Alderman John Collins-Muhammad tells the St. Louis Post-Dispatch he also fears ward reduction will hurt the black community.

By “ward reduction will hurt the black community,” John Collins-Muhammad means that it will expose the uselessness of people with names like John Collins-Muhammad.

In the greater scheme of things, the conventional wisdom among the professional civil rights crowd is that, in a hypothetical city that has a million people, is half black and half white, has twenty aldermen (city council members), and keeping all other things equal, if the city board of aldermen (city council) uses single member equal population districts rather than electing all twenty at-large over the whole city, it marginally helps black political power, whereas at-large rather than single-member hurts black power and accrues to the benefit of activist whites.  The reason is that while the districts have to have roughly equal population, in the case of our hypothetical city, 50,000 people per district, the black districts will have by percentage more people under 18 who can’t vote, more convicted felons on probation who can’t vote until they’re off paper, and just more disinterested and apathetic people by percentage.  Which means that, all other things being equal, the total voter count from the 50,000 total population black wards will be noticeably lower than the 50,000 total population white wards.  Meanwhile, if the whole city elects all twenty aldermen at-large, it means that the higher voting percentage whites will overwhelm the lower voting percentage blacks.  Meaning that single-member districts will mean ten white and ten black aldermen, while at-large probably results in something like thirteen white and seven black.

While St. Louis isn’t moving directly from 28 aldermen to at-large, it is moving from 28 to 14.  Reducing the number of single-member districts is partially functionally the same as going from 28 to at-large, in terms of the effect it will have on black representation on the St. Louis City Board of Aldermen.  My educated guess is that it will amount to a one seat in fourteen, or two seats in 28, functional marginal swing from black to white.

Of course, being St. Louis City, it’s not as if the whites marginally benefiting are any kind of Theodore Bilbo.





Still Below Par

16 05 2018

Downtown

Lyda’s infographic:

 

Notice the salary bump brings the SLPD “closer” to the pay scales of surrounding agencies. Not equal to them, and certainly not more than them.

As a certain someone you all know predicted.





Believability

4 05 2018

City Hall

Downgrade in the city government’s credit rating.

This should make you think about something I wrote here back in November on the day of my posting storm upon my return to blogging.





Only In St. Louis…

13 03 2018

Downtown

Can an active sitting incumbent member of the Board of Aldermen have FIVE outstanding bench warrants issued by the very city whose government he serves.

No insurance, suspended license, and yet another open warrant from Jefferson City, to boot.





I Have a Suggestion For April

1 02 2018

Downtown

2:

Pan-African flag raised at St. Louis City Hall for Black History Month

Today is the start of Black History Month. To mark the occasion, the red, black and green Pan-African flag will be raised at St. Louis City Hall at 10 a.m.

The St. Louis African-American Aldermanic Caucus suggested the move to honor the contributions African-Americans have made to St. Louis.

I have a suggestion for the month of April.

Though I know it will never be anything more than a suggestion, because this city can’t even tolerate a statue in a park.

But this reminds me of some unfinished business in this space.

Through most of 2015 and extending into early 2016, we had someone here in the comment boxes that some of you might be tempted to call a troll, but that’s too harsh and unfair to describe his presence and rhetoric.  Let’s call him an incredulous interlocutor.  Anyway, on occasions when I’d do a Confederate flag or statue posts in this space, one of his favorite retorts would go something like this:  “But how would you feel if an official public building few the red-black-green Pan-African flag?”

DERP.

And that leads me to my point, in finishing this heretofore unfinished business, which I remiss in not doing back then.

The first problem with the mentality that there’s some necessary requirement of fairness, in that if you have Confederate than you have to have Pan-African, and vice versa, is that it does not practically manifest in the real world.  As we can see in our own fair city right now.

The second problem is that the politics of settling the question of Confederate yay or nay juxtaposed with Pan-African yay or nay are hardly ever predicated on the bedrock of fairness, but almost always on the bedrock of tribal demographics.  Virtually nobody in Official St. Louis (by that, I mean the continuum of public, quasi-public, quasi-private and private sector important people in the city and region), who either caused, support or have no problem with the Pan-African flag flying over City Hall this month are going to turn around and say MUH FAIRNESS in the process of advocating flying the CBF over City Hall in the month of April (Confederate Heritage/History Month, in case you didn’t know), or at least returning the UDC monument to Forest Park and reconstructing the short Confederate Drive therein in accordance.  Likewise, last current year, when Official St. Louis connived to kick the UDC statue out of Forest Park, not a one of them so conspiring had the mentality that what they wanted to be done had to be done because it was unfair that there was a Confederate monument but no Pan-African monument in Forest Park.  That’s because it’s all about MUH DEMOGRAPHICS and not MUH FAIRNESS in the minds’ eyes of Official St. Louis, and for that matter, just about all of everyone else.

Third, and on this, if the incredulous interlocutor wants to correct me, I’ll be more than happy, but I highly doubt he was in the comment boxes of sites and blogs like Root, Grio or any of the many problacktard nodes on Ye Olde Internets lecturing them about MUH FAIRNESS, stating that they shouldn’t advocate for Pan-African because they would have to drop their opposition to Confederate out of a sense of fairness.  Here in the real world, when this issue base comes up, the fairness sword that the left wing and vicinity swings around is a single-edged sword that they almost always swing in only one direction.  And the disparate impact is that they want us to think about the politics of these things in abstract and universalist political terms, while at the same time either being too scared to oppose, or not actually opposing, or being okay with, or sometimes even encouraging the tribalist particularism of the other side.  White people have to be abstract and universalist, whilst non-whites can be tribal all the live long day — When that happens, I start reaching for Shift+9 and Shift+0.