• michelle

    Is there any guess to how many of the NGA employees might live in the city? If you work elsewhere, but live in the city you would still pay the 1% earnings tax.

  • John R

    So anyone know what the deal is with apparently about half of any NGA earnings tax actually would go to the McKee TIF and not to the city? (So more like only $1.4 million in city revenue per year instead of $2.4 million.) Would this TIF diversion go towards building the infrastructure on the NGA site?

    • Alex Ihnen

      And what happens if the earnings tax is repealed by voters? Does McKee take a hit? NGA? The city?

      • Nathan Bookhout

        With McKee owning the majority of the site he comes out ahead regardless. If the NGA locates there he sells his holdings at market rate and if they don’t he gets the land clearance he wants.

  • kjohnson04

    Make it clear to the alderman voting for this measure that their time in office is numbered. If they want a suburbanized St. Louis, they can be deprived of their responsibility and move to badly planned suburbs they are so interested in replicating.

  • illusion87

    Good, this area needs something other than crackheads running around. Eminent domain all of north STL!

    • Ashley Peaches

      Right, because all people who live in poverty are addicted to crack. And drugs don’t ever make it into suburban/”well developed” communities.

  • Mike F

    This is Off-Topic (mostly), but I would like to share the news about a proposed QT coming to Jefferson and Chouteau:

    From urbanSTL:


    From facebook:


    And finally from the esteemed *cough* Board of Aldermen, sponsored by Christine Ingrassia, BB249, which details vacating the alley in the relevant block behind Chouteau:


    Please call or email your alderman to urge them to vote against this bill:


    I sent emails in both my name and my wife’s to both my alderman in 25, Shane Cohn, and Ward 6 alderman, Christine Ingrassia.

    On a personal, more editorial note, I find it extremely disappointing that someone, Ms. Ingrassia in fact, who ran on being more progressive, has shown herself to be very much like the previous generation of alderman. So sad.

    • illusion87

      Slay is such a failure.

      • Mike F

        I agree (although it may be possible we agree for differing reasons), but it’s Alderman Ingrassia’s failure here that leads to great disappointment on my part. She was talked up as such a “progressive”, anti-Machine (Dim, or ‘Puke: both wings of the National Party are virtually identical) candidate. It would seem that with regards to Alderman Ingrassia, the reality has met the pavement, and those who advocate for better planning are roadkill. As usual.

        • Alex Ihnen

          My understanding is that the constituents who have bothered to contact her have been in favor of this development. One can be in favor of this or that, but if constituent opinion is overwhelmingly in one director, you at least have to listen. The pro-demo, anything new is better than old buildings constituency in the city remains very, very strong.

          • Mike F

            Listening is one thing, acquiescing is another.

            Oh, another thing. Just saw this tweet:

            “QT on Gravois pays $14k prop taxes/acre. buildings at Jefferson and Chouteau pay $42k/acre.”

            Obviously, that’s only the property tax part of the equation, and sales taxes would be a large portion of the total benefit to the City. But how much? And are the aldermen who advocate for these “developments” aware that the poor and working poor pay significantly greater portions of their income on sales and gas taxes? (Just an FYI, alderman, that’s called a “regressive” tax).

            This is a shameful. Perhaps those of us who advocate for sensible development–preservation, more comprehensive transit choices, safe cycling and pedestrian accommodations, urban design, traffic calming and roadway lane reduction, etc.–need to borrow from the anti-war movement in the sixties, and start having Teach-ins, in order to educate the citizenry about both the short and long term benefits of our views. Cosmos knows we have enough historical and scientific evidence to bolster our claims. I believe that at this point, this is the only way us advocates for sane, cost-effective, and humane development will ever–finally–break the back of the old moribund Machine here in the City. Unfortunately, we probably have five, ten years tops to do this, before the rest of the country passes this City by–again.