Facts Are Facts: The City Has Refused to Sell a Great Deal of Its Property

Alex Ihnen of nextSTL has reviewed my research of Saint Louis’ Land Reutilization Authority (LRA). The LRA is the city’s largest landholder, owning more than 9,000 city parcels, and is tasked with moving vacant city property into productive use by selling to private individuals so that they can redevelop the property into new homes and businesses.

Yet my research shows that the LRA frequently does not sell its property to people who want to buy it.

Although his post is peppered with a few unsubstantiated negative comments about the Show-Me Institute, Alex raises some good questions. I think others may have similar questions, so I will answer Alex’s questions here.

Furthermore, the Show-Me Institute is the only organization that has done the legwork to collect data on the LRA’s actions, so we are able to answer almost any question about the LRA’s operations. You ask the question, and I will be happy to do the necessary query writing to answer it for you! So, fire away in the comments section.

Land Reutilization Authority Commission Hearing - June 30, 2010
(more…)

Economic Liberty and Occupational Licensing

On Oct. 4, 2010, Show-Me Institute Policy Analyst Dave Roland, now with the Freedom Center of Missouri, spoke in Columbia on the topic of occupational licensing and the right to earn a living. Titled “Economic Liberty and Occupational Licensing: If You Aren’t Outraged, You’re Not Paying Enough Attention,” his talk relates the stories of a few specific individuals who have been harmed by occupational licensing, as well as the history of licensing — both in general, as well as in Missouri.

A Couple Thousand for Lapel Pins? Is That All?

Have you seen the “You Paid For It” series on Fox 2 news? In this series, a reporter highlights examples of wasteful government spending. The latest installment showed how the state spent thousands of taxpayer dollars on gold lapel pins for lawmakers.

Is that all? When you consider the big picture, a couple thousand dollars is not a big expenditure for taxpayers.

There are things that lawmakers can do that would save taxpayers billions of dollars — not just a few thousand dollars here or there. For example, if the government didn’t provide subsidies to private industries, whether direct or indirect, Missourians would have saved themselves $6.476 billion in subsidies since 1997. That would be a much more substantial cut!

If lawmakers were serious about saving taxpayers money, eliminating under-performing programs would be a good way to start. For example, if the state government had eliminated the E-10 Ethanol Mandate in 2008, Missourians would have saved more than $285 million through ethanol-induced fuel cost reductions that year and nearly $2 billion in present value during the following decade. Additionally, if the state government were to eliminate targeted tax credits, it would save at least half a billion dollars per year.

To find evidence of waste in Missouri government for yourself, I encourage Show-Me Daily readers to check out the Show-Me Institute’s Show-Me Living web tools. These are a great resource for accessing public information about Missouri government expenditures. Show-Me Living has answers to your questions about tax credits and tax dollars. As an example of what you can do with the site, Tom Duda used the Show-Me Living Tax Credit tool to find that the state spent more than $973 million through the low-income housing tax credit program from 2000 to the present.

A New Hope

Over the weekend, I attended the 2011 International Students for Liberty (SFL) conference in Washington, D.C. Although I have participated in a number of similar conferences over the past decade, I found this one the most inspiring. That’s not primarily because of the speeches from figures like television host John Stossel, former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, and George Mason University economist and polymath Tyler Cowen. As impressive as most of the speakers were, I have seen their equals before. I was inspired by the 500-plus students that gladly gave up a weekend to spend hours in lecture halls in the hopes of advancing liberty.

Several of the speakers have since noted the growth in both the quantity and quality of young liberty activists over the last few decades. In his Washington Examiner column, Cato Institute Vice President Gene Healy recollects that when he founded a college libertarian group in the early 1990s, “we considered ourselves lucky when we could get a couple of dozen socially awkward malcontents together to grumble about the government.”

But economist Bryan Caplan probably summed it up best: “Twenty years ago, a pack of libertarian students would have been roughly as awkward and freakish as attendees at Comic-Con … or, say, me. Now I see hundreds of students who aren’t just smart, but smooth.”

My college experience was not nearly as benighted as Healy’s or Caplan’s. I helped lead a libertarian group at Washington University in Saint Louis from 2001 to 2005, and we were extremely active: holding weekly meetings, bringing speakers to campus (sometimes multiple times per semester), debating other student groups, helping to publish a biweekly conservative-libertarian student newspaper, etc. The group was a major force in campus political life, but we were still outnumbered and isolated. There were only a few other large and active libertarian college groups across the country (Loyola New Orleans, Hillsdale College, and George Mason University spring to mind), so we felt like the last of a dying breed, a remnant of brighter days.

At one point, we tried to launch a national libertarian student group, much like what SFL has become. When we started planning for a conference, we thought 100–200 student attendees would be phenomenal, but we never achieved that because there wasn’t a great deal of interest in the idea outside of those few groups. If someone told us that, less than 10 years later, there would be a pro-liberty student group hosting a convention with more than 500 attendees (and many others turned away because of a lack of space), we would have laughed in his face.

I don’t think it has ever felt this good to be wrong. (Maybe in 2006, when the Cardinals surprised even me by beating the Tigers and winning the World Series, but I’m pretty sure this is better.) Students and young people in general are listening to the message of freedom being articulated by talented writers, filmmakers, artists, etc. — and by groups like the Show-Me Institute. I get dispirited on an almost daily basis when I see the government grow and grow, seemingly without end, but I have seen real changes in people’s beliefs since I first started tilting at these government windmills. That’s no guarantee that things will change for the better, but it is something. It’s hope.

The Time for Wishful Thinking Is Over

For years, Saint Louis officials have engaged in virtual hand-to-hand combat with the U.S. Census Bureau over the city’s population. In six of the last 10 years, the city challenged the bureau’s figures. The city was gaining people, they insisted, not losing them as the bureau estimates indicated.

Now the bureau’s official count is out … and the numbers are daunting. The city of Saint Louis has lost 8 percent of its population since 2000. As recently as 2008, the city had claimed to have a little more than 356,000 residents. That appears to have been wishful thinking. The true figure is lower — much lower: 319,000, according to the Census.

The city’s mayor, Francis Slay, didn’t try to sugarcoat what he called “absolutely bad news.” It will, he said, “require an urgent and thorough rethinking of how we do almost everything.”

The Show-Me Institute has been doing just that. From our first policy study on the Saint Louis earnings tax, to a look at tax credits, to the most recent examination of the city’s land use policy, we have focused on ways in which the city can grow instead of shrink.

One can assume that the city’s unaccredited school system has also played a factor in the ongoing exodus from Saint Louis. Parents want to live in communities with good school systems. The Show-Me Institute has published several studies and papers outlining the benefits of educational choice — i.e., letting parents decide where their children will go to school.

In short, wishing and hoping for better numbers is no longer enough. For years, the city has effectively chased people and businesses out of town with policies like the earnings tax and the issuance of tax credits that only favor certain businesses. This downward trend won’t be stopped until city leaders adopt free-market policies that encourage growth instead of discouraging it.

Privatization in Jefferson City

The other day, Combest linked to an AP story about added privatization opportunities in state government. The story focused on state building infrastructure:

Money also was a motivator as a Senate committee heard testimony last week on the possibility of privatizing the maintenance and operation of state buildings. Missouri faces a maintenance backlog estimated by a legislative panel at nearly $1 billion.

I hope that the House and Senate can reach an agreement and move forward with this idea. This is just one example of the opportunities that privatization provides to save money, improve services, or sometimes both. (This particular example would fall under the “save money” category.) Short of law enforcement, you can basically privatize any public service, and probably find examples somewhere of the private sector providing just about every type of public service. That does not mean that every single aspect of government services is right for privatization in Missouri. For example, I don’t see any chance of private fire departments coming to Missouri, although they have a number of them in our border state of Tennessee.

What it does mean is that as government services go through reviews and reauthorizations, the option of privatization should be considered for each of them. Sometimes it will be the best option, sometimes it won’t. I think that managing state buildings is absolutely something a private commercial property management company can do, and it would be great for them to be given the opportunity to do it.

Is Saint Louis Now Open to All Development?

Last night, Channel 4 aired reporter Craig Cheatham’s investigation into why the city of Saint Louis was rejecting offers to purchase some of its vacant land. The station’s investigation was spurred by Show-Me Institute research.

As I’ve written previously, the city’s Land Reutilization Authority (LRA) owns more than 9,000 parcels of vacant land, and isn’t selling most of it. Cheatham investigated two properties where the LRA had turned down great offers, for no apparent reason. To my (happy) surprise, Cheatham’s investigation led to the LRA re-evaluating its rejection of one offer to buy property: Anthony Barber’s offer to purchase 1252 Academy Ave. in order to develop the property into a restaurant. You can see 1252 Academy in the photo below.

1252 Academy Ave. in St. Louis, MO - Photo by Thomas Duda
Photo by Thomas Duda

According to Cheatham’s report, the LRA met with Barber today to reconsider his offer. The agency may, facing public scrutiny, accept Barber’s offer.

This is great news! If the LRA sells 1252 Academy, that is one less vacant eyesore, and one less property the city has to spend money maintaining — and those costs can add up. Furthermore, I am sure the neighbors of 1252 Academy will prefer living next to a restaurant rather than a vacant, boarded-up city property.

But the LRA’s decision to reconsider its decision on 1252 Academy makes me wonder whether the agency is open to reconsidering other offers it has rejected. According to Show-Me Institute research, the agency has rejected offers to purchase more than 2,200 of its properties. Only about a quarter of them were rejected because the agency thought the would-be buyer didn’t have the means to complete the project. The most common reason for rejection was that the agency was holding property for “future development.”

Of course, in most cases, that future development has yet to materialize.

Is the LRA open to taking a fresh look at some of the other offers it has rejected? As part of my research into the city’s landholding policies, I’ve worked to collect the data necessary to put together a list of other offers that might be worth reconsidering. It would be wonderful if the agency would seriously consider recanting some of its past rejections.

Why Is There So Much Vacant Land in Saint Louis?

The Saint Louis Land Reutilization Authority (LRA) owns more than 9,000 parcels of land, and the agency’s purpose, according to state statute, is to get that vacant land back into private hands so that it can be developed into new homes and businesses. Yet the city’s largest landholder isn’t selling much of its property. In an interview with McGraw Milhaven on KTRS AM, Audrey Spalding, a policy analyst with the Show-Me Institute, talks about her research into how the LRA has rejected offers to purchase more than 2,250 different properties from 2003 through 2010.

Full Interview (MP3)

Making Sense of the Midterm Elections

At the Show-Me Forum in Columbia on Feb. 7, political columnist Bob Roper gave his assessment of the 2010 midterm elections. Roper, who writes a twice a month column for the Columbia Daily Tribune, told the crowd Republicans shouldn’t get too cocky over their big gains in November. As he said in this clip, the real winner may have been the tea party.

Watch the entire speech, including Roper’s warnings about government spending and the federal deficit.

Support Us

The work of the Show-Me Institute would not be possible without the generous support of people who are inspired by the vision of liberty and free enterprise. We hope you will join our efforts and become a Show-Me Institute sponsor.

Donate
Man on Horse Charging