By Antonio D. French
Filed Sunday, February 12 at 10:15 AM
The time has come to explore the conflicts of interest that arise from the relationship between the City's deputy mayor for development and her live-in boyfriend, Richard Callow.
Barb Geisman is in charge of selecting the development projects that the city should back. Her duties often find her making decisions that determine how City and state tax dollars are spent, who does (and does not) get to redevelop certain properties, and whose property values are increased while others continue to decrease. On at least one occasion, it was her own property value that increased as a result of her decisions.
In 2002, Brian Marston reported that Geisman was asked by the Federal Highway Administration and the Missouri Department of Transportation to step down from overseeing the $20 million Washington Avenue streetscape improvement to avoid the "appearance" of a conflict of interests. She and Callow own a property at 1517 Washington.
Around the same time, Geisman's longtime live-in partner, Richard Callow, was working for the owners of the St. Louis Cardinals, seeking to get as much public money as possible to fund the team's new stadium. Geisman and her boss, Mayor Francis Slay, were presumably working at the same time to get the best deal for the taxpayers. Conflict?
Also in 2002, DJ Wilson reported that Maplewood, THF Inc. paid Callow's public-relations firm, Public Eye Inc., at least $82,315 to promote a ballot referendum that cleared the way for the new Maplewood Wal-Mart and Sam's Club. When those opened up, the Sam's Club in the City, at St. Louis Marketplace, closed, costing the City of St. Louis millions in tax revenue. Geisman was presumably working at the same time to save those needed taxes. Conflict?
In today's issue of the Post-Dispatch, columnist Sylvester Brown reports that the Geisman/Callow relationship is once again a source of controversy. Callow -- who now works for Slay as well, maintaining his blog and serving as his PR person on various political issues -- sits on the City's Preservation Board.
Citizens for Responsible Development wonder if that relationship had anything to do with the board recently agreeing to allow a 28-story Central West End high-rise that violates the standards of the Central West End Historic District, which limits such developments to 15 stories. Geisman backs the project.
The fact that this relationship has not been seen as a scandal for the Slay Administration has as much to do with Callow's relationship with the Post-Dispatch and other media outlets, as with the continuing double standard as to exactly what is a scandal.
In 2001, Safir Ahmed revisited the "scandal" that involved Tim Person, a former aide to Mayor Freeman Bosley, Jr. "Person, the [Post-Dispatch] breathlessly reported, had served as the mayor's rep on a panel that awarded airport contracts to two companies, without disclosing to anyone that his wife had previously done subcontract work for the companies," Ahmed wrote.
He continued, "Stung by the scandal and facing a re-election bid, Bosley announced the next day that although it pained him, he had asked for Person's resignation."
The time has again come for a mayor to address the continuing conflict of interest that exists in his administration.
14 Comments:
Wow, excellent reporting! Funny how some clearcut conflicts of interest just get brushed under the rug?
12:57 PM, February 12, 2006
Thank you also for exposing the scandal within the scandal -- the failure of the Post Dispatch to report matters that would embarrass those with whom the Post is cozy.
5:48 PM, February 12, 2006
Thanks Oracle and Anony #1. The point is that this relationship costs taxpayers real money and has been allowed to exist way too long.
Having worked as a political consultant in the past, I know that my services would be worth a lot more if my wife was in charge of major decisions relating to my clients.
I'm quite sure that Bill Dewitt knew of Callow's relationship to the city's deputy mayor of development when he chose his firm to help seek public funding for his new stadium.
And let us not forget that Mayor Francis Slay, presumably being adviced by Geisman, was pushing the state government for a deal that would have cost taxpayers tens of millions more than the Cardinals finally settled for. That's a big deal.
It's also a big deal that the city chose to spend millions to redevelop basically just three blocks of
downtown -- the 3 that happen to be adjacent to the property that Callow and Geisman own on Washington Ave -- while other sections of the city continue to decay. That matters.
The Post-Dispatch has been shy to report on this relationship. I think that is because the paper is part of the story. For years, the popular Jerry Berger column relied on Callow for political news. In the end, the column and the paper were just another tool that Callow could bill his clients access to. In a town with just one daily newspaper, that matters too.
6:28 AM, February 13, 2006
Don't all political consultants have conflicts of interest? Like Claude Brown, the French family has had one hand in consulting, while the other is in northside politics. Lou Hamilton and Nancy Rice are others, with Callow hardly being the only City consultant in politics.
7:27 AM, February 13, 2006
FYI: The P-D editorial page criticized the potential for conflicts of interest in a June 1, 2002 editorial headlined the Geisman-Callow Sideshow.
Several news stories before and after that editorial reported on their relationship and potential for conflicts of interest.
7:45 AM, February 13, 2006
Yes, but that P-D editorial was basically suggesting that any conflict of interest was a "sideshow" act, a diversion from real issues and not worthy of serious investigation.
The Post's reporting on the conflicts of interest was minimal and easily overshadowed even by a New Times-owned RFT!
8:04 AM, February 13, 2006
I particularly enjoy the tale of Geisman working to attract businesses to St. Louis Marketplace while her whatever he is Callow gets $$$ to lure the largest tenant away to Maplewood.
I also believe, at the time of this fleecing, Mayor Slay’s sister was also working for Callow. Hey, just another day of making our friends and family richer at taxpayer expense.
It’s amazing to us on the outside what passes as business as usual in this town. It’s no wonder the city’s in the state it’s in when things constantly done to benefit only a few good ole boys.
8:07 AM, February 13, 2006
Michael, I think you don't remember the 2002 editorial correctly. It is much longer than this, but I think these closing sentences give a sense of its position:
(Callow's) revolving door employment doesn't instill public confidence that the city has the team in place to protect the city's best interests. It's also worth asking whether Mr. Callow should be on the city's Preservation Board given the fact that Ms. Geisman's job requires her to interact with the board.
Mr. Callow and Ms. Geisman are bright, talented people who are genuinely committed to moving the city forward. But as professionals, they should have known better. A word of advice: If any deal looks, feels or smells like a conflict of interest, chances are it is.
8:26 AM, February 13, 2006
Thanks for the correction.
Now, can anyone prove Antonio wrong on the P-D's lack of real investigative coverage of the matter?
2:40 PM, February 13, 2006
Anony #5, I remember reading that editorial when it first ran. And let me paraphrase my own feelings by saying if any editorial looks, feels or smells like CYA reporting, chances are it is.
That editorial was printed long after the Riverfront Times and others exposed Callow's relationship with the Post-Dispatch via Jerry Berger.
Click here to read DJ Wilson's story.
The Post didn't come clean on this. The Post didn't expose the "Gallow" relationship. The Post has not investigated the effects on taxpayers that stem from this relationship. All the Post offers is "they should have known better."
They should have been FIRED. And the Post should have called upon Mayor Slay to raise his standards of ethics.
I think you are still missing the point. This is not something to take an editorial position on. This is front page scandalous news, by the Post's own standards.
If Tim Person deserved to be fired, Barb Geisman should be fired.
If officials using City cell phones for personal calls is a scandal, then the enrichment of "Gallow's" property on Wash Ave. is a scandal.
If somebody stealing some loose cash out of a midnight basketball fund is a scandal, a powerful couple playing both sides of numerous development issues which cost taxpayers MILLIONS is a scandal.
Am I wrong?
4:26 PM, February 13, 2006
You're wrong about the Washington streetscapes being a scandal, but you're right about the Maplewood Commons / StL Marketplace ordeal. But DJ Wilson covered that years ago. I know you like to criticize the Post, but the RFT isn't the only alternative in town. Why didn't the American, or even the Argus, make a story of the scandal?
9:22 AM, February 14, 2006
Or how about the Arch City Chronicle?
It has pretty much given the mayor a free ride.
10:49 AM, February 14, 2006
Duh, the Public Eye advertises in the ACC.
11:24 AM, February 14, 2006
Anonymous said... "I know you like to criticize the Post, but the RFT isn't the only alternative in town. Why didn't the American, or even the Argus, make a story of the scandal?"
That's a good question. The answer is that the black press in this city is even more subject to the power and influence of politicians and influential lobbyists than our sole daily.
Trust me on this. I know what I'm talking about. The black press doesn't have the same independence as larger papers owned by the likes of Lee Enterprises or New Times.
Thumb through the pages of any black paper and notice the number of government ads from agencies like the Missouri Tourism Department and the Dept. of Health, ads from local companies like Famous-Barr and the St. Louis Cardinals, and ads from public works companies like AmerenUE and Lacleed Gas.
These papers need these ads to survive. These are the life blood of black weeklies. And they are acquired through political connections.
Black publishers need politicians and politicians need the black press. It's a deal made in hell and the black community suffers because of it.
So don't expect any level of hard investigative journalism from them.
I should add that this situation is no reflection of the investigative skill of the reporters at any of these papers, but the political will of the publishers and editors.
3:46 PM, February 14, 2006
Post a Comment
<< Home