notmymayor

“If it’s just a normal TIF–it will be the largest TIF in St. Louis history–but if it’s just a regular TIF, then there shouldn’t be a problem, because this is what TIFs are for is to help redevelop blighted areas like this. But if Mr. McKee does ask for the City to back and to guarantee with its full faith and credit his bonds, there will be another fight.”

- Alderman Antonio French, KMOX’s Total Information PM, October 30, 2009

September 8, 2009 Letter to Mr. McKee from Louis B. Eckelkamp, III on Bank of Washington Letterhead

Looking for a car loan? Trying to get a mortgage? Need financing for your small business?

If so, would you ever think of approaching a prospective lender with shoddy documentation of your assets, income, and other liabilities?

For nearly all of us, the answer is a resounding no. Of course not. We would be crazy to believe that any reputable financial institution would grant us a loan for $14,000, $150,000, or $250,000 if we failed to disclose our finances on the loan application. If your name is Paul McKee, however, and your prospective financial backer is the City of St. Louis, then you apparently get to play by very different rules when applying for $390 million in financial support.

The above pictured letter represents the sole evidence provided by Paul McKee to the City of St. Louis to date of his financial capacity to build the ballyhooed ”$8.1 billion plan for North St. Louis.” No assets. No income. No liabilities. No dollar values. Does this seem very persuasive to you?

The tragic reality of life in our City today is that McKee’s mere mentions of jobs and development are enough for Francis Slay, Lewis Reed, too many Aldermen, and a considerable number of Union contractors to start marching in lockstep support of McKee’s TIF application. They want us to ignore the fact that McKee is demanding City taxpayer backing for $195 million of his bloated $390 million request. They want us ignore the fact that McKee’s “vision” includes the construction of “4.5 million square feet of office space, 1 million square feet of retail space, 2,200 new single-family homes and 7,800 apartments” despite the presence of many stalled and vacant development projects throughout the City. They want us to turn a blind eye to McKee and Slay’s pay-to-play politics and the hypocrisy that it represents. But most importantly and most alarmingly, they want us to ignore McKee’s letter from the Bank of Washington, which demonstrates a shocking lack of private investment in the proposed development.

I cannot help but imagine how different St. Louis would appear if our construction trades Unions exercised their tremendous political muscle to improve our City’s bottom line instead of McKee’s. Imagine if our City’s elected officials understood the difference between “development” and “investment.” Imagine if our Aldermen, Mayor, and Lewis Reed allowed merit to guide decision making as opposed to politics.

Frankly, I recognize that I am asking for too much, since one of McKee’s only critics on the Board of Aldermen, Antonio French, sees no problem with granting $390 million in City money to a man who offers no evidence of financing for his proposed development. Needless to say, this is precisely why other critics of McKee and I see major problems ahead.

Politics cannot will a development into existence, because impassioned testimony creates neither demand for space nor money in the bank. Paul McKee is a charlatan, and it is past time to send him packing home to Huntleigh.