Let's all turn to cable and watch Reed's commercials for a few days. They are about as factual as his mis-leading statements. Turning down an increase for the Prosecutor's office, that, by the way, was only 5 times what the City provided vehicle costs, is not the reason crime is up and Reed knows that.

President Shrewsbury has worked behind the scenes to move legislation that benefits the entire City. Reed can't even get many things done in his own ward.

The reason so many Aldermen are backing Reed is that, no matter what, Shrewsbury shows no favoritism to any of them, friend or foe. If they back Reed and somehow Shrewsbury loses it's Katy bar the door. All sorts of old fashioned back room favors will be granted that will NOT benefit the whole city. Where will St. Louis be then???

Is it just me or has the negative campaigning on this campaign seemed a bit over the top? The piece by Shrewsbury that I got in the mail today talked about Reed preventing regulatory oversight over a nursing home, also mentioning the fatal fire in Joplin, MO. What's the point, that Reed's policies leads to the death of senior citizens?

I must be missing the forums and radio shows where the two candidates sound sensible and make a good case for themselves.

Personally, I doubt that aldermen and committeepeople are going to do much to turn out voters next week; however, it seems a stretch to say that their current support of Reed is any different than past ward support for Shrewsbury.

Shrewsbury benefitted from northside support four years ago. One could say that his support for the aldermanic black caucas on various issues or support of black leadership on various committees is a payback for that, but it also could just be good politics for the city as a whole.

Similary, Shrewsbury haters point out his vote against the Prosecutor's office but have provided no evidence that the vote was anything but budgetary politics.

I have a mailpiece from today from Reed. It says that he has the endorsements of the 23rd Ward, but they are endorsing Shrewsbury.

Compile this with the other lies all over his mailpiece, and how can you believe a word he says! As he puts it on his mailpiece "THAT'S REAL LEADERSHIP!" I guess we can expect more lies if we vote for Reed.

Mr. Reed only has the support of the 23rd Alderman and a handful of residents. The powerful 23rd Committeeman supports President Shrewsbury and so does the majority of the 23rd residents. How many distortions can the once honorable 6th Ward Alderman make in one Campaign?
Come by for Monday's 23rd meeting to watch the fireworks.

Doesn't it come down to the BJC lease as an example of what kind of leader these two genetlemen are?

Lewis Reed realizes that this plot of ground long shorn off from Forrest Park its essential to keep jobs in the city.

Jim Shrewsbury would rather keep the tennis courts and playground and let the jobs move to the City of Shrewsbury or some other conty location.

It's a question of priorities-and yup I realize that some people have diferent ones-but at least there is a choice.

It does show the type of leader these two genetlemen are.

The people petitioned for the right to vote on whether parks can be used for private purposes. Shrewsbury is trying to honor their petition and let them vote. More than 25,000 people signed this petition.

Reed just wants to do whatever the mayor says. His rubber stamp would have prevented the better deal that is before the city now because he would have said yes to the mayor and BJC right away - ignoring the citizens and caving again to big business.

I agree with Jim, if it was so important and critical they would be able to tell us what they want to build on our park. Instead they say they have "no immediate plans to build." So what's the rush!

I live in the 23rd ward and I can tell you what that old man does doesn't amount to a hill of beans here. On top of that, my Alderwoman, committeewoman and the former committeewoman all support Reed. Heck, even one of his usual poll workers called me to say that she is working for Reed on Tuesday! Shrewsbury and that old man don't have a leg to stand on.

"Doesn't it come down to the BJC lease as an example of what kind of leader these two genetlemen are?"

Well, not really. While Shrewsbury was the only elected official to lead opposition to the lease, Reed was just one of a many who supported the lease deal.

We need an independt voice. Not another Yes-man for Slay, that's all Reed is.

"Don't talk about my ward" - I do live in the 23rd. I see 23rd Ward Democratic Organization on Shrewsbury's page. So how could that ward also have endorsed Reed like his mail piece says?

"the better deal that is before the city now"

Isn't that the one that Pres. Shrewsbury still opposes?

'Shrewsbury is trying to honor their petition and let them vote.'

Shrewsbury staked out that position long before the signatures were turned in. The comment I've heard him make "I don't know how it helps me to support the BJC deal".

I want E&A members to ask how it helps the city, not them.

Well we discussed it in our group meeting today. Who do we talk to with the city because we are planning to take over the west end of the park. Just like BJC, we don't know what we want to build yet, but we are an important institution and we need it. It seems like the city is just giving it away, so this shouldn't be much of a problem.

Who should we tell our students to vote for? Reed because he will do whatever the mayor says and cave in to developers quickly? Sounds great.

An obstructionist representing his own self interests or a visionary representing a brighter future for St. Louis with the tax base to make it happen? The choice is simple...Reed.

A yes-man who will give away our city to big business and not answer the phone when we have concerns or a dedicated public servant who protects our rights and addresses our issues. The choice is simple....Shrewsbury.

Yes to city services!

Yes to a stable tax base!

Yes to safer neighborhoods!

That's the kind of YES MAN I want leading our city!

Yes to Lewis Reed!

Yes to raising taxes for all these new services thats Reed is proposing!

Yes to giving his spouse a raise now that he will have a vote on the Circuit Attorney's budget!

Yes to all of the mayor's pet projects!

Yes to moving more wards from the northside!

That's the kind of YES MAN I want nowhere near the Presidency.

NO to Lewis Reed

"No man" I don't think that Lewis Reed's wife works for the circuit attorney any more. Also, I don't think that anyone will take more wards from North St. Louis on purpose. The wards are based off of the census, so if people live there they have to have the wards.

Lewis this is not a school board race. Send French back to Carr Lane. Bad move. Most people like the fact that Jim has real life skills. Your slipping Lewis. We are getting concerned about as we fear you will have your next commercial produced by Peter Downs.

Most of the development in the 6th Ward is the result of Marit Clark's initial planning and the influx of development money downtown. Development inspired by Harmon's Convention Hotel, with developers hopping on board.
Why did all the 3 candidates for the 6th Ward Aldermanic seat use the "I'll call you back" mantra for their political pieces? Because everyone in the 6th Ward knows that Reed won't return your calls.
Interesting how Antonio French used the 21st Ward Organization when his grandmother has recently passed after more than a year in coma. French isn't the Committeman and has no authority to use this misleading tag when the Committeeman, Arthur "Chink" Washington, is endorsing Shrewsbury.

It's definitely true. The most dangerous man alive is the man who can't be bought. That's why Shrewsbury is targeted by so many.

The "Prosecutor's office?"

We don't have one of those. We do, however, have the Circuit Attorney's Office.

Get your facts straight.

You mean the Circus Attorney? The City Counselor also prosecutes certain crime. Which is it?

The Circuit Attorney (functionally a "county" office) handles cases related to violations of state code and the City Counselor represents the City in all matters, be it defense of the City (when sued) or prosecution for violations of City ordinances. So in essence both serve in the function of prosecutors, while neither holds that exact title.