Rainford Refuses To Say If The Downtown Partnership Pushed Slay Into Telling OccupySTL To Leave

Occupy St. Louis earlier accused the Slay administration of asking them to leave Kiener Plaza and coming up with a list of grievances based on pressure from the Downtown Partnership:

Occupy St. Louis is one of many cities that exist as a solidarity movement with the Occupy Wall Street movement, which formed to publicly attest to the fact that corporations control far too much of our economy and political life. This movement has received vast support across the country. How ironic, then, that Mayor Slay has decided to stop listening to the complaints of the people and instead heed the complaints of the corporate groups who control the city. This week, Downtown Partnership met with the mayor’s office and told him to shut us down. He responded to their call. No more fitting example could illustrate who is pulling the strings. (For a list of who voiced the words behind the Mayor’s blog: http://www.downtownstl.org/AboutUs/PartnershipforDowntownStLouis/PartnershipBoard.aspx)

David Hunn of the Post-Dispatch followed up on this question with Jeff Rainford, Mayor Slay's Chief of Staff who previously made ridiculous accusations about OccupySTL, and tellingly Rainford refused to answer the question:

Jeff Rainford, Slay's chief of staff, refused to say if the city met with the Downtown Partnership last week, but insisted that the complaints are coming from many, not only the Partnership.

"There are lots of people complaining. I'm not going to point at one versus the other," he said. "I'm not going to get into it. What I would prefer not to happen is to have this personalized."

The city, he said, would not meet with occupiers today, nor would it discuss the issue in the press.

So Rainford won't just say that the decision was not based on pressure from a business group? Seems pretty telling. And how many of the "other complaints" are coming from Dana Loesch's rabid followers, who have been whipped up into a frenzy based on repeated lies about the group? Rainford continues:

"We're gonna cool off," Rainford said this morning. "It's probably going to get inflamed anyway."

"All I'm trying to do is to keep this from becoming Oakland," he said. "I'm trying to get this solved with no violence."

Still, he said, he understood that the occupiers may not have the same plans

Is Rainford implying that the protesters want this to "become Oakland," where the situation escalated to violence and several protesters were seriously wounded by the police? I sure hope "the same plans" was intended to refer to something else.

Occupy STL Responds to Mayor Slay: Will The St. Louis Media Cover the Response?

Update: Looks like David Hunn wrote a story about the response for the Post-Dispatch. Glad to see it. Chad Garrison at the Riverfront Times also had an interesting take on the developments. Jo Mannies at the Beacon also covered the response.

The media in St. Louis reported excitedly last week on Mayor Slay's blog post indicating that the city was planning on kicking the Occupy St. Louis group out of Kiener Plaza (at least for overnight stays). Part of the Mayor's PR campaign included releasing a list of alleged violations by the occupiers (without any evidence to support the claims). Now Occupy St. Louis has responded with their own list of "violations" by the Slay administration, and I'll be curious to see if our enthusiastic media provides equal coverage for these grievances. I don't necessarily agree with every point on the list, but surely many of them would be part of the discussion in a healthy democracy, no? And it seems like it should be the media's job to provide equal coverage to both sides of the issue.

Here's the first part of the Occupy St. Louis response:

Occupy St. Louis is one of many cities that exist as a solidarity movement with the Occupy Wall Street movement, which formed to publicly attest to the fact that corporations control far too much of our economy and political life. This movement has received vast support across the country. How ironic, then, that Mayor Slay has decided to stop listening to the complaints of the people and instead heed the complaints of the corporate groups who control the city. This week, Downtown Partnership met with the mayor’s office and told him to shut us down. He responded to their call. No more fitting example could illustrate who is pulling the strings. (For a list of who voiced the words behind the Mayor’s blog: http://www.downtownstl.org/AboutUs/PartnershipforDowntownStLouis/PartnershipBoard.aspx)

The Occupy St. Louis movement is further disappointed that the mayor has chosen to hide behind false accusations to sway public opinion and to indicate that he has spoken to Occupy St. Louis. There has been no conversation from the Mayor’s office to Occupy St. Louis, only blog posts that have not been sent to Occupy St. Louis. The mayor’s chief of staff is quoted as saying that Kiener Plaza “reeks of urine.” Anyone is welcome to come to the site to see that this is not true. The occupiers have done a remarkable job of maintaining a clean and orderly space. The other allegations issued by the Parks Department are equally untrue in blaming the occupiers for a host of grievances, ranging from the ridiculous, (glass bottles) to the obscene, (public urination). Occupy St. Louis has always adhered to the idea that public spaces are public spaces and we have no grounds to tell people to leave, other than to encourage everyone to adhere to our safe space policy. The Mayor blames Occupy St. Louis, (which is not an organization but a group of autonomous individuals coming together to make decisions collectively) for behaviors that are almost universally the actions of individuals not participating in Occupy activities and would most likely have occurred regardless of our presence. The mayor’s other concern, that the occupiers must give way to allow for other events, is equally unfair. We have shared the Plaza with other groups on several occasions so far; it is everyone’s space and everyone is welcome. On the other hand, a Macy’s display with the occupiers evicted might just be enough to convince many in the area to Occupy the Holidays by shopping only at smaller local businesses.

And here's a general description of their criticisms of the city:

To put these accusations in perspective, we are issuing today our own list of violations committed by the city, of which Mayor Slay has been the chief executive for eleven years. Some of the violations cited illustrate the inconsistent application of laws that the mayor now wants to use against Occupy St. Louis. These are cases of hypocrisy and raise serious questions about unequal protection under the law. Other violations show the city’s cooperation with Big Business and demonstrate complicity in the economic oppression being raised by Occupy St. Louis. And of course, the violations include the incredible disparity and racial injustice that this City has long been guilty of towards African Americans. In total, these violations make the trivial and untrue accusations raised against us pale in comparison.

To read the full list of "Violations" by the city, see the Occupy STL post. I should note that I can't verify that the Downtown Partnership has anything to do with Slay's decision, and my guess would be they'd deny the claim.

Update: It looks like Mayor Slay has also updated his blog, with what sounds like a pretty reasonable response to me:

I expect the loudest critics of this measured approach to be those whose political agendas are most opposed to the Occupy protestors and who would love a provoke a confrontation to “prove” some prejudice about the groups that make up the Occupy coalition. That’s not my plan.

It's hard to evaluate for me, because some times the Mayor's office says reasonable things like this, and other times they engage in clear provocation and demonization.

Bill McClellan Stands Up For Womens' Right To Be Asked Out By Wealthy Bosses

I have a strange feeling that more in-depth analysis is forthcoming from other spheres of the internets, but for now I'll just note that Bill McClellan writes some really terrible crap sometimes. From his column on the Herman Cain sexual harassment fiasco:

When I first arrived in St. Louis, I could not get on at a newspaper. I answered an ad for a job as a recruiter at a school for medical assistants. Its target audience was young women from low-income families because these women would be eligible for government loans. The young women would then use those loans to be trained for jobs that didn't pay much. The economics of it were shaky.

But the recruiters were not supposed to be selling the economics of a career as a medical assistant. We were supposed to sell the young women — and especially their mothers — on the likelihood of assistants marrying their doctor employers.

"That's why we need to keep churning out assistants. They keep marrying doctors and retiring. ..."

I say we. I did not get the job.

But I think of this army of medical assistants marching into the world with the collective dream of marrying doctors. How could this come to be if bosses are not allowed to date their employees? It would be unfair to these young women if the doctors were afraid to ask them out, lest they be accused of sexual harassment.

See that? When McClellan pines for the simpler olden days before all those loud feminists and sensitive types made life so incredibly difficult for wealthy bosses, he's not doing it for the men. He just thinks it would be "unfair" to the women.

How incredibly chivalrous.

In One Month, Occupy St. Louis Surges Ahead of Tea Party On Facebook

Recently, the Occupy St. Louis Facebook Group passed the 6,000 "likes" mark on facebook, after only being in existence for a month. This puts them well ahead of the St. Louis Tea Party, which has been in existence for several years.

It's also worth noting that unlike the Tea Party, the Occupy facebook group grew by true grassroots support. The tea party facebook group's growth was based on a big facebook ad buy, so broadly targeted that even I (an unlikely target) saw ads for several months. On the other hand, the Occupy group grew by word of mouth and sharing.

So it's nice to know that when it comes to astroturf vs grassroots, money can buy you some people, but it can't quite buy enough people to outpace an actual grassroots movement.

Jeff Rainford Demonizes Occupy STL in Anticipation of Kicking Them Out of Kiener Plaza

In case you haven't noticed, Occupy St. Louis has been camping out in Kiener Plaza since the beginning of the movement. Kiener Plaza has an official curfew of 10 PM, so technically occupying the park after 10 is illegal. The members of Occupy St. Louis believe that their First Amendment rights entail that they should be able to occupy public space, and they disagree with the curfew. This is what civil disobedience is: explicitly violating laws that you disagree with but being willing to gracefully accept the consequences of breaking the law as a way of raising awareness. Thus, I respect Occupy St. Louis's decision to stay in the Plaza.

On the other hand, I can understand why city officials might be conflicted about enforcing the rule. I'm sure they feel that it's their job to enforce the laws whether they agree with the laws or not, and this is not not an unreasonable position. In fact, you might argue that democracy wouldn't work unless police and public officials respect laws they don't agree with. Of course, as with anything, this is not a black and white issue, and there's a substantial grey area that allows for some wiggle room. My preference would be that city officials look for a way of working with the occupiers to find a compromise that allows them to continue staying in the plaza.

However, while I can understand the city's decision to enforce their laws (even if I disagree with them), what is absolutely not cool is their attempt to use overcharged rhetoric to try to demonize the occupiers. And this is precisely what Mayor Slay's Chief of Staff Jeff Rainford has done:

Jeff Rainford, Slay's chief of staff, said the camps are getting unruly, the plaza is beginning to smell like urine, and a few were recently arrested for public intoxication.

For anyone who's visited the plaza, the idea that it's "unruly" is ridiculous. They have an explicit policy against drugs and alcohol. And as far as the organizers know, the only "public urination" was from people who weren't occupiers (after all, the occupiers actually have to live there). So Rainford is trying to wage a nasty PR war against the group, which I assume he thinks will make it easier for them to remove the group without causing a controversy. It's too bad he can't just stick to the facts and say they want to enforce the curfew, rather than resorting to tea party-like smears.

The St. Louis 99% March on Bank of America for Move Your Money Day

Nice video from 99% of St. Louis:


Note that they asked Attorney General Chris Koster to not settle for a mere slap on the wrist for the big banks that knowingly defrauded the American public and continues to kick people out of their houses to this day. We'll see if Koster responds.

Learn more about the Move Your Money project here.

Infrastructure Jobs Roundtable In St. Louis Today

Charlie Edelen, Communications Organizer, Missouri Jobs with Justice sends this report from today's Infrastructure Jobs Roundtable in St. Louis. He's on Twitter @rollerreader

Labor leaders, out-of-work construction workers, academics, contractors and representatives from the Missouri Department of Transportation (MODOT) came together today to participate in a roundtable discussion in St. Louis. The panelists discussed the need for a comprehensive federal jobs bill to jump start the economy and get the state out of its current jobs crisis.

Ironically, the Rebuild America Jobs Act, legislation supported by the panelists that would create badly needed jobs in the local community was voted on and blocked by the U.S. Senate. Missouri Senator Roy Blunt was one of those voting against the jobs bill.

The roundtable participants shared information and personal testimony about why the federal legislation is urgently needed. Jeff Aboussie, Secretary Treasurer of the St. Louis Building and Construction Trades Council said that the unemployment rate for union construction workers in the metropolitan area is as high as 22-25%.

Kevin O'Keefe, 21 year member of Laborers Local 110 is one of the many trained workers on the bench. Work hasn't been steady since last year, and he doesn't know if he will be able to work the minimum hours required to retain his health insurance benefits, which could cause his family's health costs to skyrocket.

MODOT has identified projects that need improvement, but spokesman Ed Hassinger told of dire consequences without necessary funds. Without infrastructure dollars, workers like O'Keefe will continue to face chronic joblessness and our communities will not see needed improvements to our roads and bridges.

Thom Kuhn, President and CEO of Millstone Bangert talked about the impact to private contractors. Without critical transportation investments, his business is doing half the work they did in 2006. His company built the new Busch Stadium and many other highly visible projects, but needs a commitment from Missouri elected officials to create good jobs.

Gary Elliott, Business Manager, Eastern Missouri Laborers District Council, moderated the discussion and spoke frankly about infrastructure dollars. He referred to the current taboo on the word "taxes," suggesting using the acronym ROI--Return on Investment.

"Spending money on our infrastructure - roads, bridges, highways and mass transit - is an investment. You're putting people to work, generating badly needed revenue for our state and you're making the state more attractive to business by proving our commitment to logistics. In short, this investment makes life smoother for everyone. No one wants a road trip to include a flat tire or a crumbled bridge."