DOWNTOWN DEBATE
by umar ben-ivan
Recent developments on Washington Avenue have overjoyed many. They see this as
a way to breathe life into a dying city by providing an aesthetically pleasing
environment that attracts young people and businesses. They envision a
downtown St. Louis full of exotic eateries, coffee shops and night clubs that
will attract people to live, work and invest in the city.
The Rev. Larry Rice doesn’t see it that way. The St. Louis
community activist (homelessness, prison reform, anti-gambling, anti-death
penalty, pro-life, etc.) has been highly critical of the redevelopment of
Washington Avenue. He cites millions of dollars being spent on landscaping and
fancy street re-pavement as an example of “the priorities of the city of St.
Louis being focused on luring in the rich and neglecting the poor and
homeless.”
“On a nightly basis homeless women and children are being
turned away from shelters and being forced to sleep on the street because of
cuts in the city and state budget,” Rev. Rice states.
“What we have is a group of elites moving downtown and
pushing the rents up making it harder and harder for the poor to find a place
to live and the city of St. Louis doing nothing. Furthermore, these new
residents are calling the police on the homeless population and others just
because they are uncomfortable with their looks,” Rev. Rice states.
Downtown Residents Association member and longtime
downtown property and business owner, Tim Tucker respectfully disagrees.
“I was the Missouri Department of Mental Health’s housing
program director and I understand the problem and agree that social services
are underfunded on local, state and federal levels. However, the Washington
Avenue money is coming from the federal government not the local budget…Larry
Rice and that crowd really need to understand how federal, state and city
budgets work.”
In response to the criticism of too much money being spent
to make Washington Avenue look more attractive through new streetlights,
bricks and trees, Tucker clarified his views.
“We had these beautiful historic buildings on Washington and
people where moving in and creating really neat lofts, but if you drove by you
would think that the place was dead. The money being spent to make the street
look better is a message that people are living here, and you can come and
live or shop here too.”
Tucker adds that the under-funding of social services will
not end in the city of St. Louis until the city is able to attract more
residents and that anything that will bring in more residents will help “all
St. Louisans.”
In defense of downtown residents calling police, Tucker
responded, “You may have someone calling police if a homeless man urinates in
front of children in the park, but there is no real harassment being
encouraged by residents.”
Rev. Rice and many in the African-American community have
also been critical of the Washington Avenue redevelopment because they believe
that it will bring gentrification to downtown St. Louis, as has happened in
several other cites such as Chicago and San Francisco.
“We can read our history and find examples of people being
displaced, such as the forced removal of Native Americans from their land…so
this is nothing new,” Rev. Rice said.
Tucker rejects this saying, “It isn’t like there was
anyone living in the area anyway; the new loft and condo residents are not
replacing anyone since the area was almost vacant anyway.”
Jokingly Tucker states, “The only people I used to see on
Washington at night were individuals every now and then who got lost - the
place was dead.”
In regards to the construction of Washington Avenue he
adds, “We have used Empowerment Zone funding for projects such as the
convention hotel that require that workers come from within the Empowerment
Zone – a high poverty area.
“The city of St. Louis continues to lose population, and
while population is decreasing and the tax-base is getting smaller, the budget
is growing. The city still needs as many police officers and street repair
units, the city just has less money to fund essential services. Bringing in
more people means more taxpayers to help fund the city budget,” states Tucker.
Local business owners and residents have mixed feelings on
this issue.
“Bringing more young professional people into downtown St.
Louis will be good for the city and it will increase the level of
attractiveness and safety of downtown St. Louis,” stated downtown resident
Fresca Rosario, 32.
However, there are some residents of the inexpensive Ford
Building on Pine who are angry at the “sky-rocketing rents and the police
harassment of anyone walking downtown at night.”
“It is obvious they are trying to push us out,” remarked a
Ford Building resident named Tony. He went on to say, “The City of St. Louis
is using the Street Demonstration ordinance to arrest people at night walking
the streets with no cash and no identification. That’s it for me, I’m moving
back to California where I am from.”
A number of businesses catering to the new and expected
residents have opened up along Washington Avenue and many more are expected to
open within the next several months.
They feel that the increasing population in downtown will
create an opportunity for business downtown. Many of the small business owners
coming downtown see themselves as pioneers who will lead the downtown
resurgence. Other businesses disagree.
Amitin’s bookstore has been a landmark on Washington for
decades along with a handful of other successful businesses that are well
known throughout the St. Louis area such as Gus’s Shoes and Fashions (1200
Washington) and Levine Hat Company (1416 Washington). Despite its history, A.
Amitin’s bookstore will be closing its doors at the end of June.
“The city of St. Louis is driving away small businesses
committed to the city of St. Louis in order to attract large national
chains…small businesses get no help from the office of Mayor Slay” remarked
Lawrence Amitin, the second-generation owner of Amitin books.
He claims to have been pushed out in a campaign to
transform Washington Avenue into an “elite district” and that developers are
focusing on short-term trends that will attract businesses which will “be
closed within six months of opening.”
The debate over Washington Avenue seems to generally be
fought on one side by those who wish to bring life into the city by making it
a more attractive place to live, work and play, such as the Downtown Residents
Association, Downtown Partnership, and Metropolis. Opposite of these
organizations are those who would rather focus on sustainable economic
development and shoring up social services.
Clearly there is resentment between the “urbanist”
development crowd and many grassroots community organizations. Many state that
they see a group of highly educated and affluent white professionals wanting
to create a yuppie-elitist environment, and focusing on issues that will
accommodate that lifestyle, rather than working on substantive issues that
will help the working poor and create jobs. On the reverse side you have many
who feel that the traditional urban politics and community activists of St.
Louis have netted very little in the way of tangible results in the past, and
that the city has decayed under traditional development programs, and there is
a need for change.
What one group sees as evidence of development the other
sees as evidence of racism, classism and gentrification. These are accusations
that hit hard since most of the development crowd tends to think off
themselves as liberals.
Recent flare-ups between these groups have occurred over
issues such as public transportation, where the debate whether to focus on
buses for the poor or light-rail for the professional commuter rages on. A
pattern seems to be developing that shows a large rift between St. Louis
activists. One group is focusing on urban lifestyle issues, that in the
opinion of those involved feel that a transformation of the city will in the
long run benefit the poor, and the other focusing on empowerment for the poor
and social services in the here and now.
On one side of the divide you have community activists
such as Rev. Rice, the Association for Community Organizations for Reform Now,
many organizations in the African-American community, Latino community and
immigrant-rights community. The other side of the divide is made up largely of
urbanist professional organizations who tend to be culturally liberal, artsy
and educated.
Both of these groups tend to be Democratic voters and
issues such as the Washington Avenue redevelopment could divide these voters
and be an issue of contention during future Democratic primaries.
Regardless of where anyone stands on the issue of
redevelopment and Washington Avenue, recent developments have accomplished one
thing that hasn’t been done in a long time; gotten people to talk about
something other than the sports stadiums, blight and perceived crime when they
talk about downtown.
PLEASE
BUY FROM OUR HOMELESS VENDORS ON THE STREETS