24thState

Public/Private Partnerships are Bad For Taxpayers

Prop P, the Arch Tax, which appears on the April 2nd ballot in St. Louis city and county, will distribute 60% of tax receipts to the Public/Private Partnerships of Great Rivers Greenway and CityArchRiver. These organizations collect taxpayer money and private donations to fund their operations. What makes this arrangement bad for taxpayers is that Public/Private Partnerships are not accountable to the taxpayer. If an elected official misspends taxpayer money you can vote that politician out. Public/Private Partnerships can spend your tax money on dreadful projects with no repercussions.

Currently city and county taxpayer dollars fund 70 million dollars to the following Public/Private Partnerships in the city of St. Louis, the Zoo, Art Museum, Science Center, Botanical Garden and the History Museum. Ten million taxpayer dollars fund 2/3rds of the History Museum budget. Unaccountability led to the waste perpetrated by former History Museum President Robert Archibald.

Investigative reporters at the Post Dispatch uncovered that Robert Archibald had purchased with History Museum money a rib shack on an acre parcel of land for $875,000.00 from ex mayor of St. Louis Freeman Bosley Jr. This purchase was made with no appraisal or environmental study. It was subsequently revealed the land has soil contamination and is appraised at $225,000.00.

Archibald receives a yearly pay package $515,000.00 in salary and benefits and then hired the public relations firm Fleishmann Hillard a stipend of $15,000.00 a month for damage control. To make matters worse Archibald resigned and was given a golden parachute by an unaccountable board at the History Museum a 6 month consulting contract at $270,000.00 and $567,000.00 for unused vacation time. County Supervisor Charley Dooley is quoted regarding the scandal involving Robert Archibald, “I want to thank Dr. Robert Archibald for his years of service helping the History Museum become an important cultural institution that has enriched our community.”

The only person enriched was Robert Archibald on the taxpayer dime. Charley Dooley can make those types of statements because he is insulated by the Public/Private Partnership arrangement. A No vote on Prop P is a vote for accountability and against corrupt Public/Private Partnerships.

 

No on Prop P

Members of the St. Louis Tea Party Coalition in conjunction with St. Louis County Republicans have established a committee named No on Prop P.

Last year the state legislature passed enabling legislation for St. Charles, St. Louis County and St. Louis City to vote on a 3/16 of a cent sales tax awarding 40% to local parks, 30% to Great Rivers Greenway and 30% to City Arch River Project. St. Louis County must pass the tax increase or the vote is voided in St. Louis City.

St. Charles County has opted out of the tax increase. St. Charles County Executive Steve Ehlmann testified for informational purposes at the committee meeting in Jefferson City that cities could redirect tax payer money from the sales tax for unrelated development projects. Ehlmann is quoted in the Post Dispatch, “When people go to the ballot box and they vote on a tax increase, they need to be assured all the money goes where it is suppose to go."

St. Charles County Council did not allow the sales tax to be brought forward. County Council Republican Joe Brazil was quoted in the St. Louis Beacon “Whenever they need money for a bond issue (the City and St. Louis County) they come running over to us”. He was further quoted “If you want to be a metropolitan community it needs to go both ways. Not just when you need something.)

What Councilman Brazil was referring to was the city earnings tax. Residents of Saint Charles and St. Louis County pay 1% of their wages to St. Louis City for the privilege of working in the city. St. Louis County already contributes tax money for the following institutions, Zoo, Art Museum, Science Center, Botanical Garden and the History Museum. Yet residents of the city are not charged an earnings tax when they are employed in the surrounding counties. Regionalism needs to be reciprocal.

The No on Prop P committee is a grassroots effort to defeat Prop P in St. Louis County. County taxpayers will finance roughly ¾ of the funding for Great Rivers Greenway and City Arch River Project. City voters will more than likely support the tax. A city alderman advised me confidentially that the city would be foolish to vote down improvements paid for primarily by county residents. This tax is one further step closer to a city/county merger.

Prop A Promotes Partisan Policy, Not Principles

Proponents of Prop A have been selling a tainted bill of goods to grassroots conservatives.  Supposedly, 'local control' of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department represents the purest of Jeffersonian principles, identified in this quote:

It is by dividing and subdividing these republics, from the great national one down through all its subordinations, until it ends in the administration of every man's farm by himself; by placing under every one what his own eye may superintend, that all will be done for the best.  What has destroyed liberty and the rights of man in every government, which has ever existed under the sun?  The generalizing and concentrating all cares and powers into one body...

Notice the "..." at the end there.  I mention this because this is how one individual, representing an organization funded to promote issues such as Prop A, has presented it.  Well, as it turns out, this quote has been taken completely out of context, in order to sell that tainted bill of goods.  You see, this quote comes from a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to one Joseph C. Cabell, and just prior to the aforementioned quote comes this line from Jefferson:

Let the national government be entrusted with the defence [sic] of the nation, and its foreign and federal relations; the State governments with the civil rights, laws, police, and administration of what concerns the State generally; the counties with the local concerns of the counties, and each ward direct the interests within itself. (emphasis added)

Perhaps, the omission was quite innocent, but in light of the amount of money being spent for a statewide referendum that really only relates to the City of St. Louis (and its effect on the surrounding counties), I doubt it.

As I have argued in forums & threads, constitutionally speaking there are only two subdivisions: the national government & the governments of the several states.  This relationship is governed by the principle of federalism.  And as we all know, the national government is one of limited powers, while the state governments are ones of general powers, as discussed in Federalist #45 & enshrined in the 10th Amendment.  Generally speaking, state powers consist of safety, health and education, and include state common law consensus on crime, contract and tort.

The current administration of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police does not violate the principle of federalism, and falls within the state power of safety, consistent with the Missouri Constitution.  Since we have established that no constitutional or Jeffersonian principle is at stake in the issue of Prop A, we can conclude that this is an issue of policy, and policy always boils down to partisan politics.  So, where did this policy of 'local control' originate?  Well, from Mayor Slay and the STL City Democrat Machine.  If you think they sit on the same side as you in partisan politics, then you would be doing them a favor by voting for Prop A.

I have my own Jefferson quote for this debate:

...unless the mass retains sufficient control over those entrusted with the powers of their government, these will be perverted to their own oppression, and to the perpetuation of wealth and power in the individuals and their families selected for the trust.

Does Prop A allow the mass to retain sufficient control?  Well, we can follow that question with another, "Has the STL City Democrat Machine ever lost an election?"  And, lest someone think I was taking a quote out of context, please check on the source.  Interestingly, in this same letter, written from Jefferson to Francois Adriaan van der Kemp, we get the following line:

The only orthodox object of government is to secure the greatest degree of happiness possible to the general mass of those associated under it.

What can we glean from this line?  Breaking Jeffersonian principle down into baser elements, such as 'local control,' detracts from the primary focus of Jefferson; simply put, "Does this function of government make those it affects happier?"  In the case of Prop A, I would have to argue no, in light of the fact that it has already garnered much opposition from conservative grassroots groups & GOP organizations in the STL area which follow:

Tea Party groups:

• St. Louis Tea Party
• K and N Patriots
• Jefferson County Tea Party

Republican Organizations:

• St. Louis City Central Committee
• St. Louis County Central Committee
• Jefferson County Republican Club
• Concord Village/Lemay Township
• Meramec Township
• Gravois Township
• Tesson Ferry Township
• Lewis and Clark Township
• Northwest Township
• Airport Township
• Wild Horse Township

Surely, the debate will continue, but for now:

VOTE NO ON PROP A

Heritage Foundation Panel & Dinner with Steve Forbes

On Wednesday, October 10, the Heritage Foundation will be holding a Panel Discussion & Dinner featuring Steve Forbes in St. Louis.

At 4:30pm, the panel discussion will include Jennifer Marshall & Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation, and Tim Chapman of Heritage Action for America on "The End of Welfare Reform As We Know It."  The Hon. Jim Talent will moderate.  A reception will follow at 6pm, and the dinner featuring Steve Forbes will occur at 7pm.  It will take place at the Hunter Engineering Company Training Center.

Registration Information:

$75 registration fee per Heritage Membership
(Two-person maximum at Member rate)
$100 registration fee per Non-Member
$2000 to purchase a table for 10 ($1000 tax deductible)
Please register by clicking here.

For questions or additional information,
please contact Lauren Volpe Kuhn.
Call: (202) 608-1524    Fax: (202) 675-1778
E-mail: specialevents@heritage.org

Heritage Bus Tour Events



The 'Your Money, Your Values, Your Vote' Bus Tour form the Heritage Foundation will have two stops in St. Louis.

Tonight, Heritage Tavern will host an event at Two Hearts Banquet Center in Sunset Hills from 6-8.  $10/person with pub fare & cash bar.

MO Heritage Tavern Event - May 10

Tomorrow night, a panel of speakers will present at Westminster Christian Academy's Theater in Town & Country from 7-9.  This event is free to the public.

The Values Bus website has more information on the events.

 

St. Louis Tea Party - 3rd Anniversary Tea Party

If you have not heard, St. Louis Tea Party is planning a 3rd Anniversary Tea Party (with an emphasis on training & preparing for the 2012 elections), for February 24 & 25.  The event will take place at Crowne Plaza Hotel in Clayton.  Here is some info on the event:

Friday, February 24

    Hors d'oeuvres & Speech from Dr. Larry Schweikart, author of A Patriot's History of the United States

Saturday, February 25

    Breakfast, Activist Training (Beginner to Expert), Lunch & Learn with local hero Bill Federer, More Activist Training, and a Mock Caucus (to prepare for MO's March 17 presidential caucuses

To purchase tickets, click here.

The China Hub is back

Repackaged as the “Freight Forwarders Incentive Act,” HB 1476 is the reincarnation of the failed China Hub bill that cost the 24th State hundreds of thousands of dollars in a protracted and futile special session last year.

This year's “Freight Forwarders Incentive Act” is the portion of the Aerotropolis Bill SB 8 that gave $60M in tax credits to exporters who send goods out through Lambert Airport to an international destination, presumably to China. HB 1476 - heard in the Economic Development Committee today - gives the same $60M to State approved Freight Forwarders.

The questions about the China Hub bill still remain unanswered with the Freight Forwarders Incentive Act.

• Why is the rest of the state excluded from these incentives by the requirement that only freight leaving Lambert Airport is eligible for the Tax Credits?
• Why are only international freight forwarders favored by the state with these Tax Credits?  Why not include domestic freight forwarders?
•  Why are these Tax Credits transferable – allowing, in effect, cash payments to businesses that receive them and allowing businesses that do not engage in international exports to lower their tax rates?
• What is the increased tax burden to the rest of the businesses in the state?  Those that don’t receive this special break, but have to make up the difference of lost state revenue?
• Most perplexing of all, why does the Republican majority that claims to support capitalism continue to promote the same mercantilist (crony-capitalist) polices that King George used to oppress our founding fathers?

It will be interesting to see if the new label will make this bill any more palatable to the tax payers of our state who aren’t on the receiving end of this governmental largess. 

 

Graphs of Enterprise Contributions to Missouri Politicians

The only editorial I want to add to these graphs relates to the notion that Ed Martin was backed by Enterprise in the 2010 3rd Congressional District race versus Russ Carnahan - the numbers speak for themselves.

The first graph shows 2010 contributions, up to $90,000.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The second graph compares the 2010 contributions with the 2012 contributions to Ann Wagner.

Al Gore Tactics Revisit the St. Louis Police Department

On presidential election night 2000 I was working the 3rd district and responded to an auto accident at Jefferson and Arsenal after polling times had closed. The driver advised she was driving in a hurry to vote and she was just contacted by Jessie Jackson to vote and that the polls were open all night. I remember laughing at her statements when an all points bulletin was broadcast over the police radio that the polling places in the City of St. Louis were being kept open by a court order issued by Judge Evelyn Baker.

The driver had a revoked license and was in possession of crack cocaine and she sat the rest of the night in jail causing her to fail Jesse Jackson’s appeal. I was outraged that a scam had been

Jeff Roorda talking local control, Image from CBS

perpetrated and the rules of the election had been violated.

When I returned home after my tour of duty I too received the ROBO call from Jesse Jackson on my voicemail imploring me to vote after the polls had closed. I also learned the next day that Al Gore had called KMOX radio and he requested the radio station to broadcast that voting had been extended

in St. Louis City. The ROBO calls, the phony disenfranchised voters and Al Gore’s attempt to get out the vote was all staged to alter the presidential election. Forget the rules.

Now the St. Louis Police Officer’s Association has adopted the same strategy in their union presidential election. The last SLPOA election was a mandate on local control and Sgt. Dave Bonenberger.  The state control candidate defeated incumbent Detective Tom Walsh by 15 votes. Walsh along with executive Secretary, Jeff Roorda (see an earlier post we did on this guy here), who supports local control, staged a phony excuse of nullifying the election by blaming 34 year SLPOA employee, Pat Heisner, of fixing the election. This was based on sample ballots instructing the accounting firm, which conducts the election, how to format the ballots.

At the same emergency meeting the SLPOA executive board invalidated the election the board awarded a 5 year $300,000.00 salary contract with $50,000.00 in benefits to Jeff Roorda before the new president could take over. Now Jeff Roorda is walking back his statements that the election was compromised to prevent a large payout, when fired employee Pat Heisner initiates her lawsuit. Amazingly, even though there was no wrongdoing in the election Walsh and Roorda have pushed forward a new election violating SLPOA by-laws.

Al Gore and Jeff Roorda practice the same brand of politics of winning at all costs. When lying and comments based on emotion and not the facts become the norm, forget the rules.

Governments Entitled To Free Products

Cable television provider Charter has been providing free cable television to local governments as a bit of grift dating back to the local franchise agreement days, and now that the local franchise agreement has been obsoleted by a later state law, Charter is starting to turn off that free service.

Hear the wailing of the entitled government officials and nonprofits:    

American Community Television fears that if there isn't a public backlash to eliminating free service in places such as municipal senior centers and firehouses, Charter might expand the disconnections to other cities, and other cable companies would then follow the Town and Country company's lead.

"I think Charter is testing the waters," said Bunnie Riedel, executive director of the group, based in Columbia, Md.

...

At least for now, the free cable service still is being provided at City Hall in St. Peters, where Lisa Bedian monitors the city's government-access channel.

She said city officials met with representatives from Charter after the company recently cut off free cable service at the city's seniors center and, temporarily, at its recreation complex.

"We gave the folks from Charter a lot to think about, and hopefully there will be a positive resolution," Bedian said.

...

But just because Charter legally can shut off the free cable service doesn't mean that it's a smart move, said Tim Fischesser, executive director of the St. Louis County Municipal League.

"I would think that it wouldn't cost Charter anything to maintain those wires, but Charter seems hellbent on getting rid of" free service, Fischesser said. "We thought Charter was trying to beef up its public image, so we were surprised. ... A lot of local officials see it as mean-spirited."

And so on and so forth.  Notice the similarity in mindset between government officials receiving free things from private businesses and people receiving government benefits: you can't turn it off, regardless of your fiscal considerations!  We are entitled!

With a little extra governmental "We gave them something to think about, and hopefully they will see it our way under penalty of law."