Home » Politics/Policy » Recent Articles:

St. Louis Board of Aldermen: New Board Bills Week 18 of 2019-2020 Session

October 11, 2019 Board of Aldermen, Featured Comments Off on St. Louis Board of Aldermen: New Board Bills Week 18 of 2019-2020 Session

The St. Louis Board of Aldermen meet at 10am today, their 18th meeting of the 2019-2020 session. As previously noted, they have the first two meetings labeled as Week #1, so they list this as week/meeting 17.

Today’s agenda includes three (3) new bills.

  • B.B. #124 – NOT USED THIS SESSION
  • B.B. #125 – Moore – An ordinance approving a blighting study and Redevelopment Plan for the Evans Ave./N. Newstead Ave./Pendleton Ave. Scattered Sites Redevelopment Area
  • B.B. #126- Roddy – An ordinance to submit a 2020 Annual Action Plan to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) as required to apply for funding under the Community Development Block Grant (“CDBG”), HOME Investment Partnership (“HOME”), Emergency Solutions Grant (“ESG”) and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (“HOPWA”) Entitlement Programs, authorizing and directing the Mayor and the Comptroller on behalf of the City of St. Louis to enter into and execute agreements with HUD for the receipt of 2020 CDBG, HOME, ESG and HOPWA funds.
  • B.B. #127-Clark-Hubbard – An ordinance amending the Redevelopment Plan for the West End Redevelopment Area (“Area”) approved by Ordinance # 64392 dated June 25, 1998 (Exhibit 1 attached) by adding the implementation schedule now calling for projects to be completed by May 1, 2029.

The meeting begins at 10am, past meetings and a live broadcast can be watched online here. See list of all board bills for the 2019-2020 session.

— Steve Patterson

 

Most Don’t Yet Have A REAL ID

October 9, 2019 Featured, Politics/Policy Comments Off on Most Don’t Yet Have A REAL ID

Missouri only began issuing the new REAL ID earlier this year, so it’s no surprise most still don’t have one yet.

Here are the results of the recent non-scientific Sunday Poll:

Do you have a new ‘REAL ID’?

  • No: 19 [65.52%]
  • Yes: 8 [27.59%]
  • Unsure: 2 [6.9%]

My husband had to renew his driver’s license in July so at that time we got the additional documents together so he could get a REAL ID instead of a regular license. The cost was the same.

My license is up for renewal in February 2020, I’ll get a REAL ID at that time. It’s been five years since either of us has flown, but we do hope to fly somewhere in 2020. After October 1, 2020 anyone hoping to fly domestically will need either a state-issued REAL ID or a passport.

Here’s summary of the legislative history of the REAL ID Act:

The Real ID Act started off as H.R. 418, which passed the House in 2005 and went stagnant. Representative James Sensenbrenner (R) of Wisconsin, the author of the original Real ID Act, then attached it as a rider on a military spending bill, H.R. 1268, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005. The House of Representatives passed that spending bill with the Real ID rider 368–58, and the Senate passed the joint House–Senate conference report on that bill 100–0. President Bush signed it into law on May 11, 2005. (Wikipedia)

Click the link about to see more detail, including links to the votes. Several votes I checked indicated Representative Clay (D) voted “no” each time. Democratic efforts to repeal the law failed.

All REAL IDs have a star in the upper right corner.

People mentioned costs, especially if their current ID has a few years left before expiring. So say your license or state ID is valid through say May 2022 — the fee will be waived so you can get a REAL ID before October 1, 2020.

What is the cost of obtaining a REAL ID-compliant driver license or nondriver ID card?

Transaction and processing fees for new and renewal applications will be the same as they are currently.

Click here for detailed fee information. You may also apply for an early duplicate license or ID card outside of your regular renewal period (which is six months prior to the expiration of your license or ID card).

Missouri law allows for a one-time waiver of the duplicate transaction fee for persons who have not been issued a REAL ID-compliant license or ID card. License office processing fees, however, will not be waived and are $6 (three-year issuance) or $12 (six-year issuance). Personal information may be changed as part of a duplicate one-time waiver transaction, but if you are applying for a different class of licensure or to add any endorsements or restrictions, the one-time waiver will not apply. (Missouri REAL ID page)

Illinois’ REAL ID page is here. If you want to fly, or enter secure federal facilities, then you need a REAL ID before October 1, 2020.

— Steve Patterson

 

St. Louis Board of Aldermen: New Board Bills Week 17 of 2019-2020 Session

October 4, 2019 Board of Aldermen, Featured Comments Off on St. Louis Board of Aldermen: New Board Bills Week 17 of 2019-2020 Session

The St. Louis Board of Aldermen meet at 10am today, their 17th meeting of the 2019-2020 session. As previously noted, they have the first two meetings labeled as Week #1, so they list this as week/meeting 16.

Today’s agenda includes six (6) new bills. Two are interesting, potentially controversial — one regarding criminal history of job applicants (120). The other regarding residency requirements for city employees (121).

  • B.B. #118 – Roddy – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for the 3974 Sarpy Ave. Area
  • B.B. #119 – Davis – An Ordinance recommended and approved by the Board of Estimate and Apportionment authorizing and directing the Director of Airports and the Comptroller of the City of St. Louis (the “City”) to enter into and execute on behalf of the City, seven (7) First Amended On-Airport Passenger Vehicle Rental (“PVR”) Concession Agreements (the “First Amendments”) at St. Louis Lambert International Airport® (the “Airport”) containing an emergency clause.
  • B.B. #120- Muhammad – An ordinance prohibiting employers in the City of St. Louis from basing job hiring or promotion decisions on an applicant’s criminal history, unless the employer can demonstrate its relevance to the employment related decision, or where employers are required to exclude applicants with certain criminal convictions due to local, state, or federal law or regulation; and prohibiting employers from inquiring about a job applicant’s criminal history until after it has been determined that the job applicant is otherwise qualified for the job position, or the job applicant is a part of the final pool of candidates from which the job position will be filled and all of the applicants in the pool are asked.
  • B.B. #121- Vaccaro – An ordinance submitting to the qualified voters of the City of St. Louis, a proposal to revise Section 2 of Article VIII of the City of St. Louis Charter which requires City employees to reside within the boundaries of the City of St. Louis and thus allow said employees, except for City Agency and Department Directors appointed by the Mayor, to reside outside of the boundaries of the City of St. Louis, and; providing for an election to be held for voting on the proposed revision and the manner of voting thereat and; for the publication, certification, deposit, and recording of this ordinance; and containing an emergency clause.
  • B.B. #122 – Vollmer – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for the 5223 Botanical Ave. Area
  • B.B. #123 – Vollmer – An ordinance approving a Redevelopment Plan for the 5476 Dempsey Ave. and 5027 Daggett Ave. Area

The meeting begins at 10am, past meetings and a live broadcast can be watched online here. See list of all board bills for the 2019-2020 session — the new bills listed above may not be online right away.

— Steve Patterson

 

St. Louis Board of Aldermen: New Board Bills Week 16 of 2019-2020 Session

September 27, 2019 Board of Aldermen, Featured Comments Off on St. Louis Board of Aldermen: New Board Bills Week 16 of 2019-2020 Session

The St. Louis Board of Aldermen meet at 10am today, their 16th meeting of the 2019-2020 session. As previously noted, they have the first two meetings labeled as Week #1, so they list this as week/meeting 15.

Today’s agenda includes three (3) new bills.

  • B.B. #113 – Davis – An Ordinance approving the petition to establish The 2019 Grand Center Community Improvement District; finding a public purpose therefor, and containing a severability clause and emergency Clause.
  • B.B. #114 – NUMBER NOT USED THIS SESSION
  • B.B. #115 – Moore – An ordinance recommended by the Board of Public Service to conditionally vacate above surface, surface and sub-surface rights for vehicle, equestrian and pedestrian travel in the northern 120 feet of the 15 foot wide north-south alley in City Block 1880 as bounded by Cote Brilliante, Grand, Aldine and Spring in the City of St. Louis, Missouri, as hereinafter described, in accordance with Charter authority, and in conformity with Section l4 of Article XXI of the Charter and imposing certain conditions on such vacation.
  • B.B. #116 – Vaccaro – An ordinance adopted and approved pursuant to § 70.815 RSMo, authorizing the Police Commissioner to make a contract on behalf of the City of St. Louis with St. Louis County allowing St. Louis County to provide police services on MetroLink Property within the city limits of the City of St. Louis, including exercising powers of arrest for criminal offenses and violations of the ordinances of the City of St. Louis the same as possessed by the police officers of the City of St. Louis, and with the same immunity as if acting within St. Louis County, and containing an Emergency Clause

The meeting begins at 10am, past meetings and a live broadcast can be watched online here. See list of all board bills for the 2019-2020 session — the new bills listed above may not be online right away.

— Steve Patterson

 

We’ve Got To Be Smart On Crime, Not Hard Or Soft

September 25, 2019 Crime, Featured, Politics/Policy Comments Off on We’ve Got To Be Smart On Crime, Not Hard Or Soft

The phrase “soft on crime” has a long history of being used to encourage the public to support the “lock them up and throw away the key” view of criminal justice…more accurately injustice.

The 1990s panic over youth and gang violence had us characterizing juvenile offenders as “superpredators” who were beyond redemption. The popular slogan “adult time for adult crime” echoed a “get-tough” approach for punishing kids. Recently, however, the U.S. Supreme Court abolished mandatory life sentences for minors. And policy makers have recommitted to the original philosophy of juvenile justice, prioritizing the needs of young offenders rather than what punishment is deserved.

The 1990s also saw the rapid spread of a penal policy patterned after a well-known baseball refrain — “three strikes and you’re out.” This metaphorical approach to sentencing felons helped nearly bankrupt many states, especially California where “three strikes” was most enthusiastically adopted.

Thousands upon thousands of Americans were taken prisoner in the “War on Drugs” declared in the early 1970s when crime rates soared. Having surrendered this misguided campaign, the nation is now looking more toward treatment for addicts than punishment, and releasing nonviolent drug offenders from prison. (USA Today)

Fearing being labeled as “soft on crime” conservative Democrats, aka neoliberals, fully embraced tough on crime policies. This allowed them to work with Republicans to pass bipartisan legislation.

Cover of ‘Time’ magazine, February 7, 1994

This led to innocent men, mostly African-Americans, being incarcerated. Mass incarceration is now a major problem. Families were torn apart. Persons who served their time returned home to find they couldn’t get a job or housing. Recidivism was inevitable.

We screwed up…for decades.

St. Louis is a Democratic city, but mostly of old school neoliberal conservative Democrats. So the fact a majority of respondents to the non-scientific Sunday Poll think think our first black prosecutors has led to a sudden spike in violent crime shouldn’t surprise me.

Q: Agree or disagree: Violent crime is increasing in St. Louis City & County because our new prosecutors are soft on crime.

  • Strongly agree: 14 [48.28%]
  • Agree: 4 [13.79%]
  • Somewhat agree: 2 [6.9%]
  • Neither agree or disagree: 0 [0%]
  • Somewhat disagree: 0 [0%]
  • Disagree: 5 [17.24%]
  • Strongly disagree: 4 [13.79%]
  • Unsure/No Answer: 0 [0%]

Long-standing policies, not new prosecutors, are responsible for our violence. Smart solutions don’t look like the old, but now problematic, one. St. Louisans must learn to embrace change if we’re ever going to make progress in addressing our problems.

— Steve Patterson

 

Advertisement



FACEBOOK POSTS

This message is only visible to admins.

Problem displaying Facebook posts.
Click to show error

Error: An access token is required to request this resource.
Type: OAuthException
Solution: See here for how to solve this error

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe