Melvin Price Locks & Dam Dedicated Twenty Years Ago Today

Two decades ago, on Saturday June 18, 1994, the Melvin Price Locks & Dam was officially dedicated, replacing Lock & Dam 26.

Some facts about the Melvin Price Locks & Dam:

• Also known as #26, the number of the old lock & dam it replaced
• Named for the Illinois congressman that championed the project, Charles Melvin Price (January 1905 – April 1988)
• Construction began in 1979, the main lock opened in 1990, and the full structure was completed in 1994.

And here’s an image of the old lock & dam 26:

And finally, another metro east facility was dedicated on June 18th. Nine years ago (2005) the Malcolm Martin Memorial Park, where I got married recently, was dedicated.

— Steve Patterson

Readers: Same-Sex Marriage To Be Recognized In All 50 States In The Year…; I’m Now Legally Married

Over the last 10+ years public opinion on same-sex marriage has shifted from majority opposed to majority support. It’s no longer if, but when. Last week’s unscientific poll looked at the timing:

Q: When do you think Same-Sex Marriage will be recognized in all 50 states?

1. 2019-2024: 30 [26.55%]
2. 2016: 18 [15.93%]
3. 2025 or later: 17 [15.04%]
4. Never: 17 [15.04%]
5. 2017: 12 [10.62%]
6. 2015: 10 [8.85%]
7. 2018: 7 [6.19%]
8. 2014: 2 [1.77%]

There’s no right or wrong here, we’re all just placing bets. However, the 15% who picked “never” will be in for a shock when the SCOTUS issues a ruling, making same-sex marriages legal in all 50 states.

The Supreme Court’s term runs from October to June. With the high likelihood that at least one circuit will decide against state limits by summer or fall, observers say, the Supreme Court should have ample time to hear a case for a decision by June 2015, though unexpected delays could push it to 2016 at the latest. (NY Times)

On June 12, 1967 the SCOTUS ruled on Loving v. Virginia, “ending all race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States.” The same will happen for same-sex marriage, though not unanimous as was Loving v. Virginia. My prediction is the SCOTUS will decide the issue in June 2016.

And on a personal note…

The morning I posted this poll, Sunday June 8, 2014, was my own same-sex marriage in East St. Louis, at the beautiful Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park.

We couldn’t get married in Missouri, but we did borrow the St. Louis skyline as a backdrop. We plan to honeymoon in Denver later this year (fund).

Thanks to so many people, including Bryan Werner of the Metro East Park & Recreation District.

— Steve Patterson

Crossing Gravois Ave At McNair Ave

I believe the design of our physical environment plays a role in our decisions, just as other factors, like time & money, might. When the route between point A and B is a pleasant walk, many will opt to walk. But those same people who’ll opt to walk in ideal conditions will decide not to walk if the route isn’t pleasant. I also think the design of our pedestrian network is lagging, motorists would never accept equivalent conditions. For example, crossing Gravois at McNair.

The design says you should cross only on the west side of McNair. Those traveling on the east side of McNair need to use the west side to cross Gravois, per the roadway design. Because of how Gravois cuts through the orthogonal street grid, setting up the proper crossing on the east side would be complicated. With only one side of McNair available as a crossing point you’d think it would be correct.

The button and ramp are supposed to be on the same side…basic common sense.  It’s also common sense to stripe a crosswalk to guide pedestrians crossing 8 lanes (6 traffic, 2 parking).

Just don’t blame the City of St. Louis for this, Gravois is a state road maintained by the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT). I accept that crosswalks can’t/shouldn’t be striped at every street that intersects with Gravois, but if pedestrian signals are in place so should a visible crosswalk.

Can you imagine roads designed with so little thought for the users? I can’t. I’ll send a link to this post to MoDOT & city officials to alert them of the problems at this intersection.

— Steve Patterson

Poll: Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Archbishop Robert Carlson?

St. Louis’ Catholic Archbishop, Robert Carlson, was the center of a controversy last week over his testimony in a tapped deposition:

In a letter released Friday night, Carlson said he “misunderstood” a series of questions when he said he was unsure if he was legally obligated to report sexual abuse to police. Carlson had been deposed for a lawsuit against the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, where he was previously a bishop. Carlson had a role in handling claims against priests who were accused of sexually abusing children from 1979-1994. (KMOV)

The controversy continues this week.

Links:

• Video clip of deposition (2:07)
• Video of press conference on release of deposition (10:36)
• Deposition (PDF)
• Statement from Archbishop Carlson on recent deposition controversy (text & video)

In the deposition questions about mandatory reporting begin on page 84, it picks up again on pages 108-09. According to a question from one of the lawyers, mandatory reporting became the law in 1973. Carlson served as the Auxiliary Bishop of St. Paul and Minneapolis from 1983–1994, where he handled sex abuse claims.

The poll this week asks your favorably of Robert Carlson, the poll is at the top of the right sidebar.

— Steve Patterson

Absentee Landlord Quickly Located Using Internet

This post is about an absentee landlord, how the city reacts to code violations, and a blogger stepping in to make change happen. I’d originally planned to post the property address and the name of the owner, but he responded to my letter, we’ve texted, talked on the phone, and emailed. Publicly embarrassing him would serve no purpose, at this point.

Twenty-four years ago tomorrow a prominent local family bought a property in the McKinley Heights neighborhood, they’ve been renting it all these years. The house is very attractive, and maintained. The carriage house, however, has been falling down for years, at least according to a neighbor. I viewed the carriage house from the alley, from the neighbor’s 2nd floor porch, and satellite images.

The flat roof has large holes, the floor to the 2nd floor no longer exists. When I emailed city officials to inquire about why this property was allowed to be in this condition, I’d been cited for much less. At the last minute in my email I added a sentence wondering if the owner’s last name is why ore if it was incompetence. I got called on that, and apologized. A couple of days later a reply comes from a staff member at the Building Division with a copy of the 2011 violation letter and a note saying the owner failed to contact them, failed to show up for housing court in 2011, and a bench warrant was issued for his arrest. Wow, so a prominent last name doesn’t get them off the hook!

I got involved and within a week had the owner talking to the building department about fixing the carriage house. My secret? The internet!  The address of record for this property is the owner’s bank in suburban Ballwin, they pay the annual tax bill. However, it seems they discard all other correspondence sent by the city. I used the internet to find the owner’s home address, also in Ballwin. Before I’d heard back from the city about the violation letter and bench warrant, I’d mailed the owner a letter asking his intentions. I found his phone number online too, but chose to mail a letter knowing that would be less confrontational. He called me, we played phone tag a little before finally speaking.  He had no idea about the 2011 violation letter, the missed housing court date, or the bench warrant.

I got his email address so I could forward to him what the city emailed me, along with contact information for the Building Division, Cultural Resources, and a link to the McKinley Heights Historic District Design Standards. I immediately replied to the city officials I’d been emailing with to fill them in on the discussion along with how to reach him. The very next night the Neighborhood Stabilization Officer (NSO) told the neighborhood meeting the bench warrant had been served. With a bench warrant the police don’t come looking for you, but get pulled over for speeding you’ll be taken in when they see it in the system.

The bench warrant wasn’t served, as told to the neighborhood, I used the internet to track down the property owner. Most likely everyone at city hall followed their procedures, mailing letters to the recorded address. Waiting and mailing more letters. It’s very clear the address is in care of a bank. Many property owners have the tax bill sent to an address other than their home, sometimes it is the property itself. When the city fails to get a response from the first letter mailed to such an address they need to try something new rather than mailing a court notice to the same address.

How many other properties are in the same situation because city staff haven’t searched online for the property owner? The staff may not be incompetent, but the official procedures are if they don’t include taking a half an hour to do some searching online.

— Steve Patterson