Does he actually suggest that Shrewsbury is putting dogs ahead of people? Classic.

Wow. That's a very passionate (yet misleading) statement from someone who didn't even care enough to be present for numerous votes on the Ball Park Village. I'd rather vote for someone who refuses to give away public property for a song instead of voting for a coward.

Reed is leading the rush on this issue at a time when there is no urgency. The vote can wait until after the public has had a chance to vote on whether we favor it or not. The only reason he's saying it needs to be done RIGHT NOW is for his campaign. The sensible thing would be to wait on the vote. I'm sure he knows that. But saying "let's wait" doesn't drum up support when he wants to get elected.

I am very disappointed in Alderman Reed's choice of language with respect to the facility proposed for Ellendale Park. It is not a "dog pound" or any other negative stereotypes you could write. It will be a "green" facility that is the latest design in no-kill shelters for dogs. The proposal calls it an "animal house."

Furthermore, this development has nothing to do with the BJC lease proposal. The city will temporarily hand over the Ellendale Park to a private group that will build the facility and make park improvements to the tune of nearly $4 million, all done with private funds. About a year after completion of the facility, it will revert back to the city.

If Alderman Reed can find $4 million to improve Ellendale Park, I am all for it. But he can't. The city has no money.

Alderman Reed was one of only two aldermen that voted against this proposal because the other aldermen recognize it as beneficial for the neighbors around Ellendale Park and for the City of St. Louis. I am excited about the proposal and look forward to the ground breaking for the facility and much-needed park improvements.

Chuck Miller - 24th Ward Committeeman

Chuck,

Do you know why Ellendale Park was chosen for these improvements over all of the city's other parks?

How do we know that this wouldn't have been better suited in Carondelet Park, or Forest Park, or the part of Forest Park next to BJC, or in Francis Park, or the lake park in Clifton Heights, or Hyde Park, or Wilmore Park or O'Fallon Park...just to name a few?

If this project is so great, there must have been many other neighborhoods which would have loved to have it close to them. Were they given a chance? Or was this some sort of insider, back room deal?

What makes Ellendale Park so deserving of all of these improvements?

Location. Location. Location. Ellendale Park is somewhat centrally located and it is easy to get to the rest of the city from the area using 64, 44, Arsenal, etc.

As far as some insider backroom deal, you must be thinking of the last alderman. The private group did consider several other sites and made their interest known for two years. In the end, Ellendale proved the best site.

Chuck, no offense but if it is replacing the city pound, it is a pound. And why did Shrewsbury and the Mayor decide to put it in a "southside" park? $4 million in improvements would have done wonders in a lot of parks. But the improvements you are talking about are really a building and a parking lot, with some money thrown in to "improve" the recently put in playground. I think it was within the last 4 years. Thanks but no sale. The deal could have been better on any of the thousands of vacant buildings the city owns. Not on a park.

curious reader,

Do you know why FOREST PARK was chosen for these BJC improvements over all of the city's other parks?

How do we know that this wouldn't have been better suited in Carondelet Park, or Ellendale Park, or in Francis Park, or the lake park in Clifton Heights, or Hyde Park, or Wilmore Park or O'Fallon Park...just to name a few?

If this project is so great, there must have been many other neighborhoods which would have loved to have it close to them. DID BJC give them a chance? Or was this some sort of insider, back room deal?

What makes FOREST Park so deserving of all of these improvements?

Confused Citizen, you are confused. Why would anyone want to park in Francis Park or Carondelet Park to get to BJC. It seems rather ridiculous to build a parking garage miles away from the hospital it is supposed to serve.

Ellendale Park was without a Master Plan according to my understanding. So they decided to give some direction to a park that had none. But hey, St. Louisans would rather see conspiracies and "back room" deals where there are none, cause if they actually supported their leaders, progress would come to quickly, city improvements would just run rampant and we'd have to deal with people moving back into the city. Where would the fun be in all that? That's why this city needs Lewis Reed. To criticize, to oppose, to be there to ensure that we can continue to pick off those ideas that benefit the city. Unity will only bring success. Naysayers like Reed will ensure the political consultants never go hungry.

Its funny that curious reader didn't answer my question.

Cudoes to N D Pendant for answering with the exact voice of curious reader and worried citizen.

The new game in town, kind of fun really, is to take one person's post and twist it into another meaning. Very creative!

Confused citizen, I like the way you took my post about Ellendale Park and twisted it into the BJC issue. Nice job!

However, I don't think I need to reply any further, for ND Pendant did such an excellent job.

I am, however, with "Worried Citizne" when it comes to not being sold on the rationale for selecting Ellendale Park for an animal welfare facility.

You know, I think Tilles Park would have been a good choice too..

Or what about that park behind Gus's Pretzels near Lemp and Arsenal? Come to think of it, that might even be better. That park has a convenient location, and it's alot closer to the current facility.

It's near a highway too, so trucks headed off to the rendering plant from the animal welfare facility will have easy highway access.

- Curious reader, New game in town, N.D. Pendant

You see Mr. Multiple personality you are actually playing the old game of packing a comment thread with multiple posts to make it look like people actually share your ideas.

And even worse you reveled it in your last post.

You see I am old school and as such I call you a troll.

I don’t trust trolls and don’t vote for candidates that use them!

No, no...Confused citizen..don't be!

I'll cop to being "new game" and "curious reader"...but I'm not ND or Worried Citizen, they'res someone elses.

So that makes at least two of us...maybe three, and possibly four.

But what's the difference? It's the ideas that matter, isn't it? Or, speaking of games, would you rather play "shoot the messenger"?

Hey, here's something I don't know...

Do they sell the carcases of animals killed at animal welfare facilties to rendering plants like they do with the carcases of other dead animals?

And if they do put animals down at the new Ellendale facility, how many will it be? Any idea how many it is per year at the Gasconade place?

Okay, here's something I will say...I have a couple of parks near me...and I wouldn't want green space in any of them converted to an animal welfare facility.

Why couldn't they have just torn down the old one and replaced it at the same location?

The new Animal House will reduce the number of animals put down (as you put it). So your point doesn't matter. The Animal House Fund has been collecting money for what, 3 years? Yet all the people here are just now making comments about where it should be. As far as tearing the old one down and building a new one - I personally do not want to risk my child's life for the year(s) it takes to destroy and rebuild. The old facility must remain open until the new one is complete.

Animal House=
* More animals adopted - less euthanized
* Improvement to a park that needs it
* Not stealing our public park and giving it to the greedy hand of BJC

It makes sense.

"The new Animal House will reduce the number of animals put down (as you put it). So your point doesn't matter."

Now that's an excellent argument (eyes rolling).

If they kii 10,000 dogs a year at Gasconade, and kill 5,000 dogs a year at Ellendale, "my point doesn't matter." Whatever you say chief. What about the part of transporting dead animals and selling them to rendering plants. Will that be done?

As far tearing down and replacement, your point isn't very solid. The old building could be torn down in a week. The services could be "farmed" out for a temporary period while the new building is constructed. And the new building could be built in 3-4 months.

If $4,000,000 are available for this project, don't you think they could figure out a way to make that happen?

With $4,000,000, they could build a 10,000 square foot facility at $200 per square foot (equal to the cost per square foot of building a new Drury hotel...), and have $2,000,000 leftover to raze the current structure and pay for a temporary situation while the new building is built.

And leave the neighborhood park alone. Why would this scenario not work?

Maybe because the private donors would only give the money if they could find a handsome site in city park and not some nasty LRA location? Mayeb they were thinking that pet adoptions out of a rough neighborhood wouldn't go as well as they would out of a nice Ellendale location?

Maybe that's what they mean when proponents say, "location, location, location!"

-New game, curious reader, and now ACC Reader

"But what's the difference? It's the ideas that matter, isn't it? Or, speaking of games, would you rather play "shoot the messenger"?

Your message is spurious; this discussion is about why the BJC deal was good or bad.

Is 2 million + inflation the right price?

What is the land swap... where will the new 9-acre park be?

The government needs to get the best deal for all the citizens, not just the corporate ones.

What guarantees do we have that the jobs will pay a living wage?

Did you know that many health care workers can't afford Health insurance?

What about preventing discrimination and other rights of workers at BJC?

The Animal House project became relevant to the BJC lease when it was put out as part of the rationale for not supporting the BJC expansion.

My point is that they are killing animals now. It's not like they are going to start killing animals. That is already happening. So when you keep saying "what are we going to do with all these carcases and why are they killing all these animals" your point is moot because the city is already doing those things. It's like getting mad about the new stadium because "they are going to play baseball there."

ps. Have you even been to Ellendale park?

-New game, curious reader, and now ACC Reader

"The Animal House project became relevant to the BJC lease when it was put out as part of the rationale for not supporting the BJC expansion."

You are the only person that makes this link... You are using multiple Identites to propagate this thought... that is why you are a troll!!!