Joe Holleman
Political correspondent/columnist
And here I was, worried I was being too cynical.
Two weeks ago, this space dedicated itself to the 最新杏吧原创 Board of Aldermen鈥檚 ongoing sound-and-fury survey about how to spend more than $200 million in Rams settlement money.
There was a moment (a brief one, admittedly) when I was concerned that I somehow was failing to grasp the seemingly unnecessary 鈥 but apparently grad-school cool and progressive 鈥 process the aldermanic board has set up to determine what the public wants from that pile of cash.
My contention was that because the aldermen had all won elections in the wards they represent, they must have talked to a decent amount of people in those wards.
People are also reading…
And after all that communicating, if the aldermen still didn鈥檛 know what their constituents wanted, they should do the city a giant favor and quit immediately.
Too harsh?
Well, whatever cynicism my words contained, it paled in comparison to the buckets of doubt poured out by readers, who spared no expense in savaging both the process and elected officials.
Keep in mind: This negative view of the aldermanic board showed itself a week before that same body unveiled a housing bill that also focuses on processes 鈥 specifically of the kidneys and bowels 鈥 and would make it perfectly legal for the homeless to urinate and defecate in public.
Given that development, it鈥檚 not hard to believe the public鈥檚 approval rating of city leadership is any place other than in the toilet.
But enough about pee-and-poo justice, let鈥檚 take a look at what people sent to this bureau after the 鈥淩ams process鈥 was revealed.
Some were surprised that aldermen were fishing about for ideas to improve the city:
鈥 鈥淲ith the glaring needs that the city has, you would think this would be an easy process.鈥
鈥 鈥淚t seems pretty obvious that a lot of the money should go to improving city services, like the police, 911 response, trash pickup, street repair and education. To me, those are the foundation for creating a better city environment where people would want to live.鈥
鈥 鈥淭he city is sitting on gobs of money while basic services like law enforcement, emergency dispatch, trash pickup, and street maintenance are crippled to the point of dysfunction 鈥 and the elected leadership鈥檚 answer is an elementary school Junior Achievement project?鈥
Some readers took a prudent fiscal approach to the issue, with some colorful descriptions of aldermen, and suggested financial restraint:
鈥 鈥淧lease tell them dummies that investing $250 million could generate $12.5 million annually from now on. Please don鈥檛 blow this one-time opportunity to enjoy this windfall forever. To spend this on a few projects would be stupid when this could be enjoyed every year, forever.鈥
Some wrote to say they agreed with the original column鈥檚 main premise, that aldermen already know what people want 鈥 but it may not be what the aldermen want:
鈥 鈥淥f all the questions involving the challenges (residents) are experiencing, not one of the choices is 鈥榟igh crime in my neighborhood鈥 or 鈥榮peeding cars鈥 or 鈥榙rivers ignoring traffic signals鈥 or 鈥榮hoplifting at my stores鈥 ... or 鈥榯rash collection.鈥 It鈥檚 like these problems don鈥檛 exist, and (aldermen) certainly don鈥檛 want to hear about them.鈥
鈥 鈥淵ou are an idea champion. Just the wrong ideas. They can鈥檛 stand that people want safety. They want people to say 鈥榬eparations.鈥欌
Another reader cast a slanted eye on the 鈥減rocess鈥 and other allegedly forward-thinking affectations:
鈥 鈥淎ny time someone talks about 鈥榲isualizing a new paradigm鈥 or some-such phraseology, I figure that they鈥檙e getting paid by the word and will never have a plan.鈥
But while we鈥檙e mining the depths of cynicism about local politics, one reader cut straight to the chase and wondered, well ...
鈥 鈥淧erhaps the reason this money has not, as yet, been invested in 最新杏吧原创 is that it is too much in the public eye. Too many city officials have not figured out how to quietly siphon some of this juicy plum into their pockets or into enterprises of their families and associates, without the public noticing.鈥
Personally, I find this last opinion reassuring, for it means that I may be some sort of an optimist when it comes to politics.
My suspicion was that city leaders just wanted to wait until the 2025 municipal elections drew nearer before doling out big bucks and making major improvements.
Because honestly, what good is buying votes if voters forget who bought them?
Idle funds: While three public entities debate how to divide $541 million from 最新杏吧原创' lawsuit against the Rams and the NFL, the money's earning just 1.4% interest. With interest rates rising, Jim Gallagher and David Nicklaus argue that it should be earning at least twice as much.
