The St. Louis Board of Aldermen went on summer break on Friday, but not before two landmark bills were passed: Board Bill 47, which gave “teeth” to the Civilian Oversight Board watchdog group that monitors the police and corrections departments, and Board Bill 61, which established the Reproductive Equity Fund. Both bills passed on the last day before break. The EYE finds it worth noting that neither of the bills would have passed under former Board President Lewis Reed.
But we would be remiss if we did not acknowledge the apparent continuing influence of Reed on his former colleagues who remain – namely, the “Ladies for Lewis” caucus comprised of Ald. Marlene Davis (Ward 19), Pamela Boyd (Ward 27), and Lisa Middlebrook (Ward 3). In the past, this trio of North City alderwomen were reliable votes for Reed and rarely did they vote against him. Now, more than a month after Reed’s last appearance as aldermanic board president, the “Ladies for Lewis” continue to vote on bills as if he was still there.
Councilwoman Webb broke from her Democratic colleagues to vote against a bill sponsored by Councilwomen Lisa Clancy (District 5) and Kelli Dunaway (District 2) that would mirror St. Louis City’s Reproductive Justice Equity Fund. Webb was the tie-breaking vote, siding with the Republican councilmen who cowered to Attorney General Eric Schmitt’s phony legal threats.
This week, we are analyzing the curious pattern of sponsoring a piece of legislation and then either voting against it or voting “present.” An alderman typically will vote “present” if they have a conflict of interest, or there is some other compelling reason to vote for or against a bill. Rarely does an alderman vote “present” on a bill they sponsor. But on this last day of session, that happened twice.
Ald. Shameem Clark Hubbard (Ward 26) sponsored the Civilian Oversight reform bill that not only adds power, funding, and staffing to the current oversight boards, but further establishes the Division of Civilian Oversight within the Department of Public Safety and creates the Public Integrity Unit under the prosecuting attorney’s office to review wrongful convictions obtained under current and previous administrations. Board Bill 47 is a major step forward for our City and it was strongly opposed by the St. Louis Police Officers Association.
Hubbard’s bill was co-sponsored by Davis and Boyd, along with nine other aldermen. But when the final vote was taken, Davis voted “present” and Boyd abstained from voting. Board Bill 47 passed with just enough “aye” votes to pass, no thanks to two of its co-sponsors.
The EYE wants to remind everyone that a well-supported, funded Civilian Oversight Board would have never passed under President Reed’s leadership.
Ald. Annie Rice (Ward 8) sponsored Board Bill 61, which establishes the Reproductive Equity Fund for pregnant St. Louisans seeking abortions across state lines with transportation assistance, child care, and other logistical support. The bill further allocates funding to expand access to doulas, lactation support, and other vital reproductive healthcare services. During the June 28 committee meeting to vote on the bill, Ald. Middlebrook voted in favor of Board Bill 61, passing the bill out of committee and sending it to the full Board of Aldermen for a final vote.
However, when the time came for Ald. Middlebrook to take a stand against a repressive, abusive state government policy, she voted against Board Bill 61. Middlebrook wasn’t a sponsor of Board Bill 61, but her shift from supporting the Reproductive Equity Fund in committee to later voting against it should not go unnoticed.
Across the City line, County Councilwoman Shalonda Webb (District 4) seemed to have drunk the same obstructive Kool-Aid as her City counterparts. On Tuesday night’s County Council meeting, Councilwoman Webb broke from her Democratic colleagues to vote against a bill sponsored by Councilwomen Lisa Clancy (District 5) and Kelli Dunaway (District 2) that would mirror St. Louis City’s Reproductive Justice Equity Fund. Webb was the tie-breaking vote, siding with the Republican councilmen who cowered to Attorney General Eric Schmitt’s phony legal threats.
Since Reed’s departure from the Board of Aldermen, the “Ladies for Lewis” caucus seem to have lost direction and leadership, co-sponsoring board bills, and them voting against them at the next. Co-sponsoring a bill is an implicit acknowledgment that a legislator supports and does not have any conflicts with or reservations about the language included in that bill. To later vote against that same bill without removing that co-sponsorship is confusing, and raises questions.
It is at best a political play meant to generate support as next year’s aldermanic elections loom; at worst, it is a false promise to colleagues and voters who depend on their perceived support to advance legislation.
—
Sticking to the theme of inexplicable aldermanic behaviors, Ald. Jack Coatar (Ward 7) – recently-announced candidate for President of Board of Aldermen – continues to add to his lengthy history of sponsoring and/or voting on legislation that directly benefits his campaign donors. A few weeks ago, Coatar called public attention to himself after his refusal to recuse himself – or, choosing not to participate when his financial supporters stand to benefit – from a vote to issue a demolition permit filed by Lux Living.
Frankly, the EYE finds votes like Coatar’s – cast for the financial benefit of a political donor – to be akin to the the pay-to-play scheme that led to indictments due to federal corruption charges and forced the resignations of Board President Lewis Reed and Aldermen Jeffrey Boyd and John Collins-Muhammad. Considering how close Reed and Coatar were during their shared time at the Board of Aldermen, those who care about government transparency and should pay close attention in the weeks leading up to the August aldermanic president primary.
Next week, though, the Preservation Board will meet again and another campaign contributor to Coatar – Ocean City One, LLC, merely a shell corporation of Lux Living seeking yet another review of its plans to construct a multi-story apartment building at the site of the Engineers Club Building on Lindell Avenue. Destruction of this historic property previously was pitched by Lux Living in December, but the Preservation Board voted 4 – 1 to deny a demolition permit.
Coatar, a recipient of thousands of campaign dollars from Lux Living, was the sole vote in December in favor of issuing the demolition permit. Although Coatar did not have the legal obligation to recuse himself at the time, he arguably did have an ethical responsibility to his constituents and the residents of the 18th Ward, where the Engineers Club Building is located.
Now, Coatar has a legal responsibility to disclose the conflict of interest and to recuse himself from voting on something beneficial to his financial benefactors under Proposition R. Despite using “Ocean City One, LLC” in its filings with the City, Lux Living has yet to file the necessary paperwork with the Secretary of State required to, for example, legally own property. Regardless of what Lux Living wants to call itself, conflict-of-interest disclosure and recusal are nevertheless required of Coatar.
But if Coatar has been trying to find a way to distance himself from his close ties to Reed, his political operation, and the Reed conduct of governance, the ambitious young alderman is not doing a very good job of it.
Since Coatar’s first run for office in 2015, he has employed the exact same political consulting firm as Reed: the Kelley Group, along with its subsidiary Show Me Victories. This is the same entity that helped gain public office for former St. Louis County executive and Steve Stenger’s subsequent wins, as well as the now-indicted former board president Reed and Spy Plane enthusiast Alderman Tom Oldenburg (Ward 16). While we do not believe that a person’s association with someone who has a criminal conviction is necessarily bad, we cannot ignore a close political relationship with other elected officials who have directly participated in, been charged with, and/or been convicted of criminal behavior.
In an important development in the last few weeks, Coatar’s political action committee, “Jack PAC,” filed paperwork with the Missouri Ethics Commission to advise that Terence Niehoff, the criminal defense lawyer representing former alderman Jeffrey Boyd, began serving as his campaign finance treasurer on July 6.
A quick review of Coatar’s recent quarterly campaign finance disclosure reveals significant sums coming from Lewis Reed’s past financial supporters, including a $2,600 donation from the local Carpenters Union (currently embroiled in its own scandal and alleged wave of federal white collar crimes), $2,600 from former mayor Lyda Krewson, and $2,600 from Lou Hamilton. Political insiders know how close Reed was to the Carpenters Union before their respective falls-from-grace. Since Krewson and Hamilton have long supported and funded the political status quo for decades; their support is unsurprising.
Some other red flags and perhaps indicators of upcoming development projects: tandem donations $2,600 contributions from Beulah Properties, LLC, and its founder, Mayokun Aiyelokun. Although “Beulah Properties” is misspelled in this most recent disclosure report, the donations follow a pattern of donations from developers throughout Coatar’s seven years in office, including a maxed-out $2,600 donation by Aiyelokun in 2020; $2,600 from 900 N Tucker Building LLC (recipient of a nearly $12 million tax increment financing deal) in March; and $5,200 in June from Jeff and Anna Tegethoff of Tegethoff Development, another multi-million developer from West County. Dozens of developers have poured tens of thousands of dollars into Coatar’s war chest over the years, and he has paid them back with political favors and sweetheart development deals to the detriment of financing for St. Louis Public Schools.
The question we asked last week remains unanswered: who does Jack Coatar really serve?
Looking at his financial disclosure statements, it’s becoming more and more clear that Coatar’s priorities are aligned primarily with those of his political donors rather than the public good.