By Antonio D. French
Filed Wednesday, September 12, 2007 at 2:05 PM
You can't blame a guy for trying.
Alderman Charles Quincy Troupe appeared on Lizz Brown's radio show this morning to counter any claims that he ever spoke in favor of House Bill 1, the economic development package which contained the Distressed Areas Land Assemblage Tax Credit.
Brown even played for her listening audience the first few seconds of PubDef's recording of Troupe's testimony in which he criticizes the bill as a "Christmas Tree" for legislators around the state, "with the exception of the Land Assemblage part of the bill." Brown then quickly instructed her engineer, Howard, to turn off the tape.
She and Troupe of course left out the part when Troupe said, "Mr. Chairman, I think the bill is a great bill... I think it brings a lot of economic development to the area and I support everything in this bill."
PubDef wasn't the only one who was shocked by Troupe's 180-degree turn in Jefferson City. State Rep. Jamilah Nasheed, who has consistently opposed the Land Assemblage Tax Credit, was visibly furious with Troupe after his testimony.
She argued with him as he returned to his seat two chairs away from her. Across the lap of Rodney Boyd, lobbyist for Mayor Francis Slay, Nasheed voiced her displeasure in a loud whisper. When her loud whisper was no longer a whisper at all, she and Troupe took their conversation to the hallway.
The conversation ended with Nasheed walking away and yelling "sell out" to the alderman and former state representative.
Guess she misunderstood Troupe's testimony too.
Troupe will be hosting a forum tonight on the dangers of the bill he called a "great bill" three weeks ago. Fellow aldermen April Ford Griffin, Freeman Bosley, Sr., and Marlene Davis are supposed to be there as well.
The entertainment starts at 6:00 PM at Lexington School, 3130 Norwood Avenue.
Labels: Media_Watch, Troupe
9 Comments:
There IT goes again.
9/12/2007 2:47 PM
Maybe Troupe is senile and doesn't know what he was saying.
9/12/2007 4:37 PM
Nasheed and Oxford are the only real opposition. Troupe is really disturbing because of his inconsistency, while the other aldermen are simply trying to appear independent so the public is appeased. They are attacking McKee, in a sloppy manner mind you, in order that the public says "well they did try."
It is upsetting because Troupe was really the guy I expected to be against the plan and with a certain vigor. Meanwhile the other aldermen will be paid and McKee will do whatever he wants. Why? Hubbard Senior said it best, "we will work with any developer." People are so starved for development they don't have standards nor do they seem to remember what these areas looked like when they were thriving.
Ironically, these same suburban developers, their developments in suburbia, are partially what destroyed the City. They made their money building homes which people bought thus abandoned the city and inner core suburbs. Their claim would be "its what the people wanted," however the result of this sprawling pattern is divestment in the city. Destroying one community for another is not positive for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area.
Only now, after suburbia is arguably developed to its maximum, is Paul McKee looking to the City. Perhaps if he pioneered and created an infill or rehab market in the 80's, and Paric was around back then actually a donating member of Landmarks Association, then St. Louis Place wouldn't be this bad. Hyde Park would look different as well.
But no. He is "investing" now because he wants to do slum clearance and yet another suburban project. This is what the Team Four Plan wanted. He is fulfilling this plan.
Those state reps have already been paid but more importantly need the support of aldermen for their elections, like Hubbard, thus added local control in order that aldermen are happy and pass support along come election day. Moreover, it also is about abdicating responsibility. Local control also means that if the project goes to hell, well issues like zoning are chosen locally, so Hubbard and Smith are not responsible. The aldermen made the decisions per local control thus it is their fault. This entire situation is about as corrupt as it gets. I commend Nasheed and Oxford for having ethics. Too bad others are lacking in that capacity.
9/12/2007 4:44 PM
The biggest hypocrite in this is Jeff Smith. The guy talks about how he is fighting this but he can’t stop it. Then he talks about how he has made changes to the law that will give the community groups input and control over any development. The whole time he is doing this, he is making fun of Allen, Patterson and the others how have been fighting this. The revised bill provides no input for neighborhood groups, nor should it. It is not their property. The money is coming form the state, not the neighborhood groups.
Fortunately, the law only says that the whole Board has to approve the redevelopment plan. That approval will be easy to get. Do you really think a majority of the Board of Aldermen is going to say no to $100 million investment and the union jobs it will create? The 75% 25% requirement for development will be easy of McKee to get around. He just creates two LLCs. He is already using a bunch of entities to acquire land.
Smith should just admit this is a good thing. He ought to admit that some poor people are going to get pushed out and that it is a good thing for the city. He needs to be 100% for it.
This development could save north St. Louis. Anyone who is not 100% behind it is a fool.
9/13/2007 8:33 AM
Yes, this is great for holders and flippers and sellouts who want to make a buck up here. Those $$$ will all stay in the city right? The restoration group, and anyone else with property up North should sellout.
Perhaps if anything that was put forth actually stimulated development, those who read it would be for it.
Are you seriosly saying a landbanking developer has more right to State funds than a neighborhood based non-profit?
Again, if you read it, you have a different opinion than if you didn't. But the way it is written, few took the time to actually decipher it, I believe, including many who voted on it.
ie: Troupe's flip-flop was likely once he read it. Sounded like a gift till you unwrapped it.
9/13/2007 12:24 PM
I hope Smith is making fun of me as well because I have been on this issue since December 21 of 2006. But at least I didn't try to bust into a casino with a fake id in order to study economic development with my rural legislative buddies.
9/13/2007 8:33 AM, it is not a good thing. It was written by a suburban developer who has no ability to do urban development. He has never done urban infill construction. He is not rehabbing single family homes. He can't even manage to build Express Scripts' new Headquarters within walking distance from two Metrolink Stations: North Hanley and UMSL North. There is absolutely no way to walk from either station to that HQ. What he does do quite well is suburban tract homes and on a large scale and huge Earth City-like office parks as in North Park. This is not appropriate for a City.
We already have ways of improving our neighborhoods: historical tax credits and the healthy home repair program. We don't need to accept 100,000,000 for one man. He has no ability.
9/13/2007 1:29 PM
The bill is just the latest in Paul McKee's many schemes to make millions without ever building a damn thing.
Look at Winghaven -- McKee cashed out before the project was done and before its initial promises started faltering.
He'll do the same in north city -- use this tax credit, maybe a CID or TDD or two, and get as much public money as he can before a sidewalk gets poured.
He'll then sell the land to homebuilders who will build cheap, fast and lazy -- and charge big bux to live next to their jammed-together shitty little boxes.
When the development stalls or fails, or the promised corporate world headquarters site gets rezoned residential for some vinyl monsters, he will be nowhere to find.
9/13/2007 9:45 PM
Doug Duckworth said...
I hope Smith is making fun of me as well because I have been on this issue since December 21 of 2006. But at least I didn't try to bust into a casino with a fake id in order to study economic development with my rural legislative buddies.
I am glad you mentioned that. The word here in Jeff City is that the video tapes of Smith’s fun at the casino are very revealing. Particularly the tapes from the cameras in the parking garage. Smith has surprised his colleagues with his ability to take drinks, meals, sports tickets and other junket from lobbyists. (I really never thought that anyone was capable of doing that. These guys are unbelievable.) But apparently the tapes show him receiving another type of favor in a lobbyist’s car that won’t likely be reported on his Mo. Ethics report. It also explains why he didn’t have his wallet with his ID.
I understand Antonio has made a request for the tapes. Be warned it may be too hot for YouTube.
9/14/2007 8:30 AM
WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT? Anonymous, thank you! Antonio, you betta GET these video's. Please oh please oh please...oh please oh please.
9/14/2007 9:29 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home