Historical April 1993 article. Dates, prices, services and contacts describe the source period; current availability has not been established.
St. Louis will soon have a new mayor and at this juncture it seems quite likely that, for the first time, an African American will occupy Room 200 at City Hall.
A recent column by Gregory Freeman in the Post made clear that the expectations regarding the magnitude of change that this new mayor could bring should be tempered by cold hard reality. Any person elected mayor in a large American city has to face certain facts.
First, municipal revenue is not growing and cannot keep up with the costs of basic services, especially personnel. Second, the problems of a decaying infrastructure—roads, bridges, water lines–only increase with the passage of time.
There arc no contingency funds to cover long overdue repairs.
In St. Louis, perhaps the most famous example is Forest Park. There, the sewers were installed about the time of the World’s Fair and were meant to he temporary.
A couple years ago, it was estimated that it would take $46 million to restore the park, the lion’s share going to sewers.
If Forest Park comes to mind first, other major city parks also need road resurfacing or restructuring and other basic repairs. Finding revenues again will he a magical political feat.
A new mayor can reorder certain priorities but he or she must do so within the constraints of money and jurisdiction. Careful negotiation and coalition building may lead to progress in certain areas but it cannot spin straw into gold.
When cities were able to undertake massive development or to initiate a variety of social or neighborhood programming, they did so with federal dollars.
This largesse dwindled considerably in the early 80s.
For example, St. Louis’s Community Development Block Grant was halved, not counting for inflation.
It would be nice to he able to believe that a changed regime in Washington, D.C. would once again create urban programs funded with nonlocal dollars..
In truth, we can expect more Block Grant funding and maybe a special stimulus package will address some infrastmcture needs in the area. But, the halcyon days of the 60s and 70s are gone and they will not return.
The enormity of the federal deficit precludes most new initiatives.
All this is not to minimize the symbolic or substantive effect of new direction. But, either hope or fear about changed leadership in the city must be tempered by the fact that economies governs politics.
As long as local governments must raise their own revenue (unlike European cities which receive continuing subsidies from their national governments), those that have experienced job and population loss are at a disadvantage.’ If I’ had some form of second sight, perhaps I could lay out a solution to the central city dilemma. One of my graduate students a few years was very disappointed that I could not.
He asked what the point was.
The point is that victories on the local front are produced with great difficulty, with a lot of grit and a lot of ingenuity. Progress and change can take place but only within very real limitations.
Originally published in The Times of Skinker-DeBaliviere, April 1993.
Read this article in the original newspaper issue.
Original source: SD_Times1993_04.pdf, printed page(s) 2; PDF page(s) 2.
