IS CARA SPENCER ST. LOUIS’S ANSWER to Elizabeth Warren? You could be forgiven for thinking so. Like the senator from Massachusetts, Spencer seems to have a plan for everything. As a candidate for St. Louis mayor, she touts proposals to reform economic development, strengthen public safety and help the city recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, among others.
This is the first bid by Spencer, 42, for citywide office. She has been alderwoman since 2015 for the 20th ward in the southeastern section of the city, which takes in part of lively Cherokee Street and also includes impoverished yet stabilizing areas like Dutchtown and Gravois Park.
This year for the first time, all candidates for mayor will compete in a nonpartisan primary, which is set for March 2. Primary voters will be able to vote for as many candidates as they like. The top two vote-getters will compete in the general election on April 6.
Aside from Spencer, the mayoral candidates are businessman Andrew Jones, Treasurer Tishaura Jones, and Board of Aldermen President Lewis Reed. McPherson contacted each candidate’s campaign for a telephone interview, but only Spencer and Reed agreed to them. (The interview with Reed will appear in the next few days.)
Spencer spoke with McPherson in a Jan. 23 conversation that covered development, tax incentives, the city budget, policing and other issues. An edited and condensed version of the conversation is below.
McPherson: Let’s assume Mayor Cara Spencer takes office this spring. For developers and other investors who are interested in doing projects in the city, what message do you want to send?
Cara Spencer: We are going to be building for our future. We have had a reactionary form of economic development for some time. We’re going to reorient that. Right now, we typically are developer-led. That means projects are proposed by the developers, and we’re often put in a position to say yea or nay.
Being proactive means really identifying projects that the community would support, and helping to drive investment where we need it. That’s a good thing for both the community and the developers, because now we’ve identified areas where we need development, where we need investment, and where those investments will be supported by the community.
Is there a recent example you can think of in the city where you felt the community’s needs were really well-served?
I’m looking at some of the developments that are going on in North St. Louis right now — those are very good things. We have made some strides in shifting that dynamic lately with SLDC (St. Louis Development Corp., the city’s economic development arm). I can speak to some of the development in the ward I’ve represented. We have been successful at addressing vacancy, stabilizing commercial corridors and making sure that those commercial storefronts remain commercial.
Otis Williams has announced his retirement as executive director of SLDC. Who should be the next head? Do you have anyone in mind?
I do have some thoughts on that. That’s not something I’m going to share right now.
SLDC said recently that it also wants to be more proactive, and focus more on rebuilding neighborhoods, in line with its new Equitable Economic Development Framework. Do you have any priorities for what that should look like in terms of concrete projects and priorities?
Sure. The city’s economic development arm shifting to focus on neighborhoods is a very good thing. It’s important that as SLDC looks to replace Otis Williams, they work with whoever the next mayor is to put somebody in that position that can help make this a reality. It’s important to remember the SLDC is a separate governmental entity. The SLDC board really gets to choose who runs that organization. It’s important for their own benefit that they work with the mayor in making that appointment.
You’ve talked about typewriters still being used in some city departments, and how the city needs to modernize the way it serves citizens. To what extent does “typewriter syndrome” affect SLDC?
SLDC has been able to operate separately from the city; they are maybe a couple of steps ahead in many ways.
“The city’s economic development arm shifting to focus on neighborhoods is a very good thing.”
Part of the problem is the siloing of planning. We have a planning agency within SLDC; we have a planning agency within the city of St. Louis. And the separation of those two things leads to problems. We need to have a fully integrated system.
SLDC currently is funded through grants and developer fees. It has autonomy in its funding structure and its governance structure, being directed by its board of directors rather than exclusively by the mayor. I was really glad to see Otis Williams mention that funding piece when describing some of the changes SLDC is putting in place.
What would be a better way to fund SLDC?
We should look at having a relationship with the general fund, to ensure that those incentives are aligned. We need to have an up close and personal conversation about how we fund economic development. That is something I have brought up for many years. We have an inverse set of incentives for SLDC. We rely on SLDC to vet these projects, and they come back and tell us that they’re worth doing, but they get paid by these projects. We have to take a look at that. That is not a question you answer quickly, nor is it a question you answer without a very thoughtful approach.
What changes in terms of tax incentives should developers expect?
I’m bullish on St. Louis. We are going to grow over the next few years if I’m elected as mayor; there’s no doubt about it. We have a federal government coming to the table to support cities like we haven’t seen over the last four years. It is important that the city is judicious in its tax incentives for its own bottom line. But that is [also] good for the developers. Our developer community needs a city that is smart about its incentive packages, so that they can be successful in investing here. Nobody wants to invest in a city that is willy-nilly with its tax incentives.
Four members of the city’s nine-member Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Commission are serving on expired terms. Do you have any ideas for who you would nominate?
Those TIF appointments have to go through the Board of Aldermen. I don’t think the board would be excited about approving those important posts in an outgoing administration. I think it’s important that they would be filled by the next mayor. I’m committed to taking a look at more involvement from the Board of Education.
Let’s look at the city’s budget. What are we going to be hearing on that in the first 100 days from Cara Spencer’s administration?
The most important thing in the first 100 days is getting the budget under control. We are seeing very significant budget shortfalls as we go through these COVID cycles. We saw sales tax receipts down by 22 percent; and hotel and restaurant sales down by 80 percent; 50 percent. These are huge drops.
We have a very serious budget shortfall ahead of us at a time when, following a national economic boom, St. Louis as a region failed to capitalize on that. We performed at about a quarter of the national average during the last 10 years of economic expansion. We are not really that well-prepared going into these budget shortfalls.
“I am committed to reorienting how we fund public safety.”
The earnings tax on the April ballot is incredibly important. We need to make sure that passes so we have a budget to work with.
We are going to be spending money smartly. I am committed to reorienting how we fund public safety. A big piece of that is shoring up some of the departments of city government that support public safety outside of the police department. [For example] I’m talking about a problem landlord unit in the Building Division. This is an investment that will pay for itself, but we’re going to have to allocate some funds for it on the front end.
Will you continue Mayor Lyda Krewson’s practices for rebuilding the city’s budget reserves?
That’s a good question. We’re going to have to weigh that with the real critical needs for citizens. One thing that worries me is stabilizing the budget…through attrition of employees. That’s problematic. If we are not filling potholes, etc. and investing in those services that our government is expected to deliver for its customer base, its residents, we’re going to lose those people. It has to be done in a balanced way. I can’t answer now without really knowing where the numbers are going to fall for fiscal year 2021 and looking ahead at fiscal year 2022.
What should the city’s priorities be for spending its COVID relief funds?
I want to see priorities in how distribute the vaccine. This has to be done in an equitable way, and one that is rooted in building trust in our communities with our healthcare system and our government as a whole. We also need to prioritize supporting our small businesses and making sure those on the margins — neighborhood businesses that have been disproportionately impacted by COVID and by our economy in general, businesses owned by people of color, businesses with less than 10 employees — are prioritized in relief funds.
How do you think downtown is doing right now?
I am very worried about downtown. Through COVID we have seen…just mayhem in the streets. The issues downtown [faces] are a lot longer than just COVID-related. Office rents have stagnated for decades. When those investments don’t grow, it makes investing in downtown untenable. The second-largest building in the state of Missouri, the AT&T tower, has been vacant. This is horrifying. The Millennium Hotel, right there on the riverfront, has been vacant.
“I am very worried about downtown…Office rents have stagnated for decades.”
This is a major impediment to growing our broader community. We cannot be successful without a successful downtown. That means providing a place where St. Louis County, St. Charles County residents — our surrounding community — are engaging in a meaningful, productive manner on a regular basis. As mayor I’m going to focus on shoring up the safety of downtown and developing a riverfront that mirrors what many other successful cities, including Detroit recently, have made investments in.
What do you make of the draft 2030 Jobs Plan from the new business/civic organization, Greater St. Louis Inc.?
I think it’s great. The focus on the inclusive aspect is important — like COVID relief – and making sure that that gets into the hands of black-owned businesses and businesses that have less than 10 employees. That’s a very critical piece of the jobs plan — recognizing the important role those businesses play, and recognizing the disparities in our small business community.
The jobs plan aims for 50,000 new jobs in the urban core in the next 10 years. Is that realistic?
I do think it’s realistic. We’re going to see some shifting market dynamics nationally that will position St. Louis to grow our population. If we can get our crime moving in the right direction, and we make some real strides in addressing the racial segregation and disparities in our community, then employers are going to be interested in relocating here.
How big of a financial issue for the city are its pension liabilities?
The pension liabilities are significant. They’re the fastest-growing line item in the city’s budget. We have got to better understand how to provide those benefits to our employees — civil service employees, and police and fire — in a way that recognizes the service these employees give our city, but doesn’t bankrupt us. The most important thing for pensioners is that we don’t go bankrupt.
I need to ask you about Board Bill 221, which would combine the trustees of the city’s two retirement funds for firefighters. Budget Director Paul Payne and Comptroller Darlene Green have both raised concerns about the negative impact this could have on the city’s finances. Twenty aldermen are co-sponsoring the bill. Why are you one of them?
It’s important we take those concerns into account, but I understand the effect of the changes in the pension to impact the bottom line a little differently than that. Pensions get very, very complicated. I am a little disappointed that we are looking at this at the 11th hour. My strong preference would be that we not move something like this so quickly through the Board of Aldermen.
You’ve made it clear in your platform that you want to get away from serving special interests. But some people would argue that the firefighters, their lobbyists and their pension administrators are a good example of a special interest that the Board of Aldermen is catering to.
The interests here are our city employees, and they are our frontline workers. To conflate the firefighters, and those are who responding on a daily basis to emergencies throughout our city, as special interests – and confuse them with those who are working to privatize the airport, for example — that’s just not a comparison I’m willing to make. It’s important that at the end of the day, we do take the bottom line of the city’s budget as a very important component of any and all decisions that we make.
On policing and criminal justice, you’ve laid out a 10-point crime plan. One of your top priorities is “focused deterrence.” What are the details of that, and would it incorporate programs like Cure Violence?
Focused deterrence is a data-driven approach to effectively addressing violence. Most recently in Oakland it helped drive down the homicide rate by 50 percent in just six years. It also worked here in St. Louis. We brought it here in a pilot program in 2012. It reduced recidivism significantly. It focuses on individuals who are at high risk of participating in violent criminal activity. That requires some coordination on the front end to understand who those individuals are, and coordination with our law enforcement and the services we can provide to individuals to help turn their lives around.
“Focused deterrence is a data-driven approach to effectively addressing violence.”
Focused deterrence can shift the orientation from a geographical focus to a much more efficient and effective focus on the individuals at high risk. It’s extremely cost-effective. We estimate that we can do this for significantly less than a million dollars the first year. It works hand-in-hand with Cure Violence. Cure Violence works completely outside of law enforcement, providing members of the community tools to de-escalate situations.
Is the leadership of the police department on board with this?
Police departments across the United States are supportive of this program. The recent Teneo report, which was conducted by the former chief of the Washington and Boston police departments when they saw reductions in their homicide rates of about 40 percent each, even mentioned focused deterrence. This is a program that we know works.
Regarding public safety director Jimmie Edwards and police chief John Hayden: Do they keep their jobs in a Cara Spencer administration?
I’m not prepared to answer that at this point. I do recognize that Chief Hayden has brought in some good changes within the police department that I appreciate.
What message do you want to send to rank-and-file police officers?
Our rank-and-file police officers are overwhelmingly good folks. We are grateful for the work they do to make our neighborhoods safer. I will be committed as mayor to supporting the officers who put their lives on the line. In doing so, that requires a commitment to rooting out the bad apples in the police department, to make their work safer and more effective. I’m going to make sure the police department has the tools it needs to engage in community policing and proactive policing, and is committed to rebuilding trust between communities and the police department. We have to unwaveringly set the table for both communities and police to heal those divisions.
Turning to more general topics, should there be a new vote by city voters on reducing the number of aldermanic wards from 28 to 14?
I don’t believe so, and I’ve been firmly against that from the beginning. Voters spoke overwhelmingly loudly [in 2012] when they supported the reduction of the board.
There’s been a real failure on the part of the board leadership — namely the president of the board — to plan for ward reduction. The bill that the voters passed directs the city of St. Louis to reduce its wards at the end of 2021. Under the leadership of the current president [Lewis Reed], who has reigned over the Board of Aldermen over the eight years that this has been in effect, we have done zero planning for it.
Time and time again during forums, he has pointed to the fact that he has made calls to aldermen to ask them if they’re planning on retiring or whatever. Well, he hasn’t called me. The boundaries of wards should not be dictated on whether or not you have a positive relationship with the president of the board. The citizens, and the best interests of our community, should be driving what those ward boundaries look like.
Should the city of St. Louis rejoin St. Louis County?
I think that should be on the table. I am currently leaning in that direction. I’d like to hear more from residents. That’s where I think a conversation afforded by the Board of Freeholders could be instructive. I’m disappointed that we haven’t set that table. We need to have more regional governance, and the structure of our regional governance should be one that is more collaborative and makes more sense for us.
As mayor, would you try to reheat the Board of Freeholders process?
Absolutely. I would definitely be in favor of having that conversation and helping to lead that discussion.
In terms of policy, what are the biggest differences between you and each of your Democratic opponents, Tishaura Jones and Lewis Reed?
Lewis’s policy agenda over the last couple of years has been catering exclusively to special interests, from supporting [developer] Paul McKee to trying to, at all costs, ram privatization of our airport down our throats at the 11th hour. My policy differs tremendously from Lewis Reed in its orientation and who it answers to.
When it comes to Tishaura, I have to say I agree with many of her policy positions. I think I take a different approach to governance. I am extremely hands-on. I will bring a tenacity to my positions like you saw in the discussion of airport privatization: an unwavering commitment to doing the hard work of not just being on the right side of issues, but working tirelessly to get the outcome that’s in the best interest of our citizens.
At Lambert Airport, the status quo continues. You’ve been one of the biggest opponents of privatization, but some of the consultants who worked on the Fly314 privatization effort, which Mayor Krewson stopped in 2019, said the airport isn’t generating enough revenue under its current model to fund meaningful improvements.
That was consultants who wanted to privatize the airport. Nobody who seriously understands how airports are financed would ever say that. For one, Lambert is one of 12 airports in the nation that gets a revenue stream to its city. That revenue stream is unusual. Most airports generate zero. Secondly, most commercial airports have debt associated with them; they bond out their infrastructure. Having debt associated with an airport is a healthy approach to investments in airports.
“We are finally competitive on a national and international basis for increasing traffic there [at the airport].”
Under Rhonda Hamm-Niebruegge’s leadership, we have decreased the cost [for airlines] of doing business at the airport by 50 percent. It’s phenomenal what’s happened in the last 10 years. We are finally competitive on a national and international basis for increasing traffic there.
The debt from the last expansion is scheduled to roll off; before COVID hit, my understanding is it was scheduled to roll off in five years. This is the perfect and appropriate time to bond out additional debt for another phase of Lambert. It’s a good amount of time to have engagement with the business community, the county and the state — those areas that serve the airport and pay for the airport by using it — to involve them in the conversation about what’s next, and to drive what that looks like.
We have logistical assets here in St. Louis [airport, rail lines, Mississippi river port] that are phenomenal. We have the capacity to grow our manufacturing and logistics like no other place in the nation, and the airport should be a part of that discussion, in the sense that it is part of the transportation infrastructure of our community. The conversation needs to be held in that context, rather than siloed off like a county office. The fact that we leave most of the infrastructure decisions up to the aldermen to decide ad hoc — ward by ward, neighborhood level — is crazy. We need to plan for our future, and that means having an infrastructure plan in place and a funding stream that will pay for it.
If you weren’t in politics, what would you be doing for a living?
Before jumping into politics, you may know that I was a mathematical modeler, working for large companies helping them make smart decisions for their bottom lines. I jumped into public service in 2015 when I ran for alderman. I did that without much background in politics. I love serving the general public. I could of course go back to working in the private sector, but knowing what I know now — the impact that hard work, determination and an unwavering commitment to the citizens’ best interest can have — I would continue in some form or fashion to serve the public. –McP–
[Like this story? Be notified by e-mail every time McPherson publishes a new item by dropping a note to Editor Jack Grone at jgrone@mcphersonpublishing.com. There is no charge for McPherson’s content, and I will not sell or share your contact information.]
