Support for Donnybrook is provided in part by Design Aire Heating and Cooling.

Donnybrook is made possible by the support of the Betsy and Thomas Patterson Foundation and the members of 9PBS.

Hey it's Alvin Reed sitting in for Charlie Brennan on this beautiful Thursday evening.

Hope you're having a good week and it's going to be a big weekend in St.

Louis.

We got the Cincinnati Reds in town with the Cardinals.

We got the BattleHawks playing a playoff game against Louisville on Sunday.

And we also have the Worldwide Technology Raceway, IndyCar Racing, IndyNext, a truck race as well.

So big weekend of sports and shout out to the Sports Commission for helping bring all these things to town.

Joining me tonight of course is Wendy Weise, media veteran, a founder of our show from the St.

Louis Post-Dispatch, Bill McClellan.

I forgot your name somehow.

Thank you.

Joe Holleman from the St.

Louis Post-Dispatch.

And in the lovely hat, Sarah Fenske from St.

Louis Magazine.

So why the chapeau this evening?

Well, I was at Forest Park Forever's annual luncheon, which is their hat luncheon.

And I got to judge the hat contest this year.

And there were so many Donnybrook fans at that luncheon that I thought, I should just wear this hat as tribute.

Well, there you go.

All right.

But it's a lovely hat.

I'm a hat wearer.

Okay.

Where's your hat, Alvin?

Oh, well, you didn't tell me.

Right.

I actually bought one this weekend.

It's so large.

So there you go.

All right.

Well, big week for the police board.

I think the first thing that happened was Judge Moriarty ruled that the tornado money was not part of the general fund money.

And the police board vows to take it to the Missouri State Supreme Court.

The police board tabled a discussion on some pretty big raises for higher brass at the police department.

That's on hold till June 17th.

We'll see where that goes.

And we've got an attorney for the police board making some big money, as reported by Sarah Fenske and St.

Louis Magazine.

So, Bill, I'll start with you.

And let's start with these raises for these, what they're, with white shirts.

The white shirts.

The lieutenants and the captain.

You know, it's difficult for me to argue against the raises for the white shirts, just because I know some of them.

And I hate to be here on TV saying that lieutenants and captains shouldn't get a raise.

But I really think that when we're, I think the police need a lot more money, but I think the police who need the money are the patrolmen and the sergeants.

Because when we're talking about like suburban districts poaching the city department, they're, the suburban districts, they really want younger cops who are on the street, in their patrol cars.

They're not really trying to poach lieutenants and majors and captains.

You know, they promote from within, which I think is the healthy thing to do.

It helps morale.

Occasionally, they'll have a search for a chief and they might take a St.

Louis major or lieutenant colonel to be the chief.

But as much as I like some of the lieutenants and the captains, I don't think we should be pouring a lot of money into them.

I think that like 22% raises or whatever they're talking about are too much.

I'd like to see the police board be a little more collaborative or conciliatory.

So all, with all due respect to the guy.

I won't dare show up at Columbo's again.

You're welcome, Bill.

You will be.

And I think the sergeants are already, they've been taken care of, correct?

In the last wave.

I agree with you.

It seems that we should be focusing on the patrolmen, the people who are riding around in the patrol cars and are boots on the ground, if you will.

I still kind of think that with all due respect to Judge Moriarty, who is clearly a highly respected jurist, but I still kind of think that the state of the state Supreme Court will overturn this because if that 55, if that 1955 precedent holds up in terms of Kansas City and that all of the revenue, however derived, I think that's going to be, that's going to be the key.

And I'm sure that Judge Moriarty really cares about my legal opinion, but I just have, I have a sense that it might be overturned.

I never want to predict where a court is going to go because, you know, they're reading the law in a way that we never can.

And that's why we don't make the money that they make.

But I will say with these raises, what I find so offensive is just the timing of them, not just the timing of giving a 22 percent raise in this economy when we're all just kind of white knuckling, trying to deal with inflation and rising costs.

And it's like, wait, now we've got to pay this on top of this.

You know, this is a point in the year where the city had already turned over its budget to the E&A that has to sign off on it.

They got to get this thing finalized by July 1st.

And for the police board to announce on Monday night, hey, on Wednesday, we intend to push through this thing that then blows a hole in the city's budget, not just because of what it does to the police budget, but the fire budget.

It just feels incredibly disrespectful to not say, let's have like a slower moving discussion about how we can build this in.

Let's work with the city budget director.

It feels like such unilateral action that it just, it feels offensive.

There's a couple of points here.

And we've had this disagreement on this show before.

I believe what the police department is trying to do is, and I believe they are sincere in their feeling that for the last 10 or so years, police have become the excuse for every wrong thing and that they haven't gotten any respect for the last 10 years.

And while it's easy to say, and I agree with you to an extent about the white shirt raises, I think there's a couple of things going on here.

One, if all the white shirts leave now, we're really going to be in trouble in the city because then who's going to bring up those new young officers?

Who's going to show them how, what it means to be a police officer in the city?

Are that, are those numbers too high?

We could argue that forever.

Should it be 18 instead of 22?

But I think what they're trying to address is, is what they believe is a lack of respect that the profession of police officer has gotten over the last 10 years.

And they are holding their line.

And I think about the going to court.

If I remember being on the show a month or so ago, I thought when they were criticizing them going to court with it, it was, no, you have to determine what the pot is we're trying to divvy up.

And I think Judge Moriarty's is one step.

She says, okay, now this is the pot.

They're going to appeal that decision because you can't sit down and negotiate for raises until you know the money available.

And that's all they were doing.

And if you remember, it was the city that sued first.

It was the city that decided to basically walk away from the negotiating table and said, here's the money we're going to offer you.

This is what it says.

And then come back and says, it's an unfunded mandate.

And there's even questions about that.

So the idea here is, is I think what we're seeing is, is we're trying to, we're looking at a situation where the police once again, are being painted as the only bad guys in this situation.

And I think there's probably a little bit of blame to go on.

I'm going to disagree with that, Joe.

I think, and I think the police feel, have been feeling disrespected for many, many years and rightfully so often.

But I don't think that anybody is trying to, this is like watching friends who are getting a divorce, you know, and you think, geez, I like the city.

I think that the leadership right now is moderate.

And I like the police.

And I don't think that everybody's saying that the police are the only bad guys in this.

I'm saying that I wish people could be a little more collaborative than I have seen.

Well, because they're not, they don't seem to be seeing things as clearly as all of us who sit around and talking about this situation do.

Because without the police, you have no city.

And without the city, you have no police.

So they've got to somehow work it out before it's just this, it's already feels like scorched earth, but they need each other.

And I think if we had cooler heads, if you didn't have that, you know, there is a progressive group of people in the city.

And I think that the mayor, you know, she cannot ever appear to be working too closely or too warmly with the police.

It's a mess.

It's a mess.

And meanwhile, the only winner of all this is the police attorney who's making a sizable little piece of lube.

But that's not illegal.

No, but it's not good.

It's like $1.5 million for this firm, which is where they're likely to end up for the year.

It's like, really?

You're trying to tell me that the city has to pay for this guy who has sued us and who's, you know, made these sort of like, you know, as you say, Wendy, it's this very scorched earth tactic.

And then the city gets stuck with the bill.

Joe, to your point, we can't solve this until we know what the courts are going to say.

Well, then why the heck wouldn't they wait until there was actually a ruling from the court that they plan to appeal to before dropping this on the table and saying they need 22%?

Because they're negotiating the contract, Sarah.

They're not waiting.

The idea that we're all on the same side, Sarah.

They're not on the same side.

You'd like to say, oh, the city says work with us.

I've dealt with management and they always say work with us.

Management loves to say work with us.

I was going to say, Joe, I was going to say that you were talking about overtime.

You know, when I became an editor and you're not a reporter, all of a sudden, oh, I get more money.

But at the same time, that overtime was really sweet.

All right.

For those of us who knew the Eric Schmidt, who was a Glendale council person and a moderate state rep in Jefferson City, well, he's kind of changed.

And the school board president in Kirkwood, Judy Modica, if I mispronounced it, I'm sorry.

But on a personal social media post, she used the 86-47 lingo, which in her mind just meant time to, you know, get rid of the president of the United States, not take his life.

Eric Schmidt said, put out a post that said that she was saying murder the president of the United States.

And she has now received numerous death threats.

And it's just kind of a mess.

Joe, what are your thoughts on this?

I know you wrote.

I wrote the story.

So I was going to say what you just said.

The, you know, we, our newspaper, obviously, it happened in the morning, the Eric Schmidt.

It was mid-May when Ms.

Modica posted about the Stephen Colbert show and talked about how she was going to miss that show and then ended with the line of, well, I guess there's nothing else to say but 86-47.

And Eric Schmidt on Monday reacted to it, basically calling her out for calling for the assassination.

You know, there's so many things that go on on social media that you never know what argument do we grab off of social media where this he said, she said sort of thing.

And what flipped our paper to actually covering it was when the Kirkwood School District released a press release to explain the situation.

Otherwise, we were like, you know, is this really news?

I think a senator going after somebody who's just, you know, OK, yes, she's with the school board, but that's a municipal office.

It feels very heavy handed, like Goliath is like calling out David there.

That to me, I get why it's news as much as I try not to cover these kerfuffles online.

I feel bad for this woman because I feel like all of us have reasons to be afraid.

All of us have employers who'd rather have us not speak out.

All of us have some sort of conflict of interest.

You guys remember the woke ginger who got fired because here he is working for a food nonprofit.

And everybody's like, oh, you have to be careful for your employer.

All of us have some reason to be careful.

And that has left very few people to speak out against the Trump administration.

OK, this is another one where you have both both sides.

I can understand.

Like, I don't think that the president of the Kirkwood School Board ought to be on social media just at all.

Well, well, I would say no.

I mean, like I would never go on social media.

I mean, what's the point?

What are you making?

But on the other hand, there's a great point wants this sort of thing because Eric Schmidt wants to be vice president and to be vice president, you have to be an attack dog.

You know, he's got it charted out, I think that J.D.

Vance or Cruz, you know, might pick something like him.

So he likes these culture wars.

And, you know, I mean, I don't think he ought to be doing this, but I don't think that Kirkwood School Board president should be on social media.

I'll do respect to Bill.

I love when people are not on social media.

I do not allow my kids to be on social media.

I hope they never join it.

But if you're the Kirkwood School Board president, people are tagging you on stuff all the time.

It's the way you keep your finger on the pulse.

It's the way that constituents hope to reach you and send you messages.

She's got to be on there.

I thought this was her personal.

It was her personal, personal.

It 100 percent was, which goes back to my point.

But still, in 2026, when people don't even believe that there have been legitimate assassination attempts against this particular president.

I think just the obviously she was upset about Stephen Colbert.

But, you know.

But 86-47, that is so disingenuous to say it's an assassination.

Right.

I was a bartender.

We used to talk about 86.

It wasn't like, oh, you're going to kill him.

Right.

But things are more heated today.

And I just think if you are in a leadership position, before you hit enter, I think you would say, hmm, 86-47.

I don't know.

I think this is kind of like, I am Spartacus.

You know, James Comey says this thing and they bring the full arm of the state after trying to charge him with like, you know, assassination.

The judge says this isn't true.

We all need to stand up.

And I would.

But I would say 25-47 before I would say 86-47 in 2026.

Okay.

I'm being from Kirkwood.

Okay.

Used to be a school district foundation board.

If she had called me and said like, hey, I'm about to send this.

I would say like, don't do that.

Because in the seat you sit in, this is just some nonsense and controversy that the school district does not need.

If you want to be on social media, say go team.

Our students are doing great.

Things are going well in Kirkwood.

I'm sorry.

I don't want to sound rah-rah.

But I just don't invite this into the school district.

And there's your new hashtag.

25-47.

Sorry.

Nobody can argue.

It doesn't have the same ring, Wendy.

I'm sorry.

But what does 25-47 mean?

What does that mean?

The 25th amendment.

Oh.

I thought you meant the 25th president.

Can you tell us who the 25th president was?

No, not right now.

Give me a minute.

I think I was alive then.

You must have really hated him.

I think I was alive.

All right.

Meanwhile in Maplewood, a couple who have been in the United States for many years has basically been on the route to being deported.

They were doing all that they were supposed to do, except they, I guess, were here illegally by definition.

Wendy, what do we do with this?

And all Maplewood kind of came out to support them.

And it's another sad story, I guess.

They're seeking asylum.

It's Daniel Ortega.

The president of Nicaragua.

They were trying to get away from some political oppression in Central America.

And they were following all the rules.

This couple, he works a 12-hour shift for the schools.

She works the other 12-hour shift for the schools.

They were doing everything they could to try to learn the language, to be part of the fabric of the community.

They were checking in like they were supposed to.

And then because this grace, this little window of grace has been abruptly shut in terms of people who are looking for asylum.

And there was that sort of grace window, as long as they continue to do everything correctly by the time they went to asylum court or before the asylum judge.

And that has been yanked out under President Trump.

And so it is heartbreaking.

And he has been deported.

I believe he's still in Louisiana.

Or he's waiting for deportation.

His wife and their daughter.

It's just a tragic set of circumstances.

And it shouldn't be happening.

It should not be happening.

I think that if you're going to have that grace for people who are seeking asylum, give them that grace.

Don't pull the rug out from underneath families.

The only thing I didn't understand about the story was they have six older children that they left behind.

And as a mother, I would still be concerned about my six older children having to pay the price for their father's whatever affront to the president.

So it's a very sad story.

Anybody?

I wish they would come up with some solution.

I mean, the thing is, it's not going to.

Immigration is an issue.

And people being here without permission is going to be an issue.

There's obviously cases that fall into those gray areas where people are trying their best to follow the steps, which the federal government can make steps that would confuse a person whose English was their first language and grew up in this country trying to read federal reports will make anybody's head swim.

So one would hope there's some sort of special court of last resort or court of relief to say, OK, let's pause the clock on here.

I mean, but what is clear and what your feelings are about Donald Trump, nonwithstanding part of the reason Donald Trump and a bunch of Republicans were elected was the people said we needed to crack down on illegal immigration.

This is not something that the Trump administration just kind of came up with on their own.

There is a feeling out there that too many people were let in in the Biden administration.

So now is it being overcorrected?

Quite possibly, which is what happens when you make one bad move.

Government tends to overcorrect it with another bad.

Well, I'd say it's well past the quite possibly thing.

I mean, these people, you know, the U .S.

has always allowed people to seek asylum and by the Biden administration did us no favors by letting everybody in to seek asylum.

But that's the law.

These people came in.

They were doing exactly what they were supposed to do.

The Trump administration also cut the number of asylum judges.

But these people are patiently going through the steps that they were told to take.

And all of a sudden, you know, when Donald Trump ran for office, Joe, he talked about the worst of the worst.

And it's really hard to imagine that these two hardworking people working janitor jobs are the worst of the worst.

And I certainly did.

They have no right.

I certainly don't say that.

I'm just saying you said there was a possibility.

It's been overcorrected.

I said more than a and I'm saying that that that the there needs to be some stopgap put in that can prevent things like this from happening, because the idea it's not going to stop.

They're not going to go back to Biden rules for immigration.

No, all we want, we write what we want more asylum courts.

Let's have the asylum judges again.

I think I think the immigration bill is going to pop up here.

Nothing may change in November.

Everything may change in November.

So I think that that immigration bill will pop up depending on how things go in Tornado.

Joe, I'm going to stay with you in Tornado.

Listen to me.

The city hired the Tornado consultants.

They came in, got paid a whole lot of money for, you know, a considerable period of time.

We were all kind of looking around saying, like, wow, what really got done?

But meanwhile, they got a lot of money out of it.

Thoughts on that?

Well, I I think when you're probably there's probably people on the police board who are having that very same thought when they say our budget can't take another dime.

There's apparently a company that's going to make over ten million dollars and they're having to be in the city's got to send them nasty letters saying, please finish your work for the ten point six million dollars.

And I think that's another thing that that goes back to the police issue with this is, is that and this is not unusual for a government to overspend on consultants.

That's been going on since I've been covering this business.

But it's what makes it a bit when we talk about disingenuous.

When you tell the police, we don't have a spare dime for you guys.

And that's like, oh, but we're giving this company from California ten million.

We think for now maybe we'll end it.

I mean, come on.

Everybody knows that city budget has waste in it.

And here's a prime example that came up where you throw money around until somebody else comes to you.

Going back to the old when management always asks our union, you need to work with us.

And then you bring up how much money they spent on their salaries.

Well, that's not part of it.

Joe, the police department didn't have money for the soundproof walls at the shooting gallery down there.

And they mysteriously found everybody.

Well, everybody can shake three million dollars out of the couch.

I'm not sure what your point is, though.

I think everybody lies.

That's OK.

That's why you negotiate.

Well, these consultants, I mean, it's ridiculous that it's come to this point.

I remember saying that we have to do something immediately while people are enthused and try to rebuild North St.

Louis.

And instead, we have a 26 person committee and we hire consultants.

Well, I think this goes back to you need FEMA to handle disasters on the local level.

You have a brand new city administration where people don't know how to respond to this sort of stuff.

And they're in there trying to respond to it.

Of course, they're like, let's try to outsource this to some experts.

Well, guess what?

As experts, number one goal, let's try to get paid, you know, and that's what happens when you bring in consultants.

But what other choice did they have?

But do we do we feel comfortable now now that they've extended?

But now they're telling them we've extended you, but we want you gone.

Do we feel comfortable that City Hall is up to this task from this point on?

I think I think I think they've set up a lot.

And I think the payments do stop it at this time.

OK, Sarah, you had a story on our developer, which is going for a data center adjacent to where the armory is.

We kind of didn't like the story too much.

Tell us a little tale.

I'd say we don't know yet whether he liked the story, but he certainly didn't like the questions that our reporter was asking.

You know, there's been a lot of controversy around this data center coming in because data centers are controversial.

But there hasn't been much reporting around who is this company?

You know, who's running this?

Have they pulled off a project of this magnitude before?

Ryan Kroll, our staff writer at St.

Louis Magazine, started asking those questions, found a lot of interesting answers.

The company trying to do this has not pulled off a project of this magnitude before.

However, they do have some things in the works that it looks like they're going to get across the finish line, suggest that they probably are for real.

However, the guy who's kind of the face of this project, he has a 16 million dollar judgment that was filed against him personally.

And boy, was he angry that Ryan was even asking about it.

It got very heated.

Some threats, just kind of ugly.

Well, when you're talking about a three billion dollar data center, I don't want to hear the editor of a of a of a daily newsletter say probably will come to pass that that that doesn't pass any sniff test in my imagination.

So I feel like all data centers are having trouble now getting projects across the finish line.

It is such a heated arena.

There was a front page story in the Wall Street Journal today saying like 70 percent of projects that said they were going to come online next year haven't even started.

Like it's a colossal number.

So I think there is some uncertainty just in this arena.

And I think the last thing you need is I don't call him a front man, but somebody that OK, on top of everything else, you have a judgment against you and people are big and and people aren't really trusting in this process.

I'm against these data centers anyway.

Move the fastest.

You know, I don't I don't like I don't like artificial intelligence.

It scares me.

And so I'm looking for any reason to stop these.

And I think that the guy not wanting to talk about the fact that he has this huge judgment is enough to make me back off.

And when he doesn't want to talk about it, you think, what else don't you want to talk about?

So I would not to hire a consultant for.

You know what?

He doesn't want to talk.

But we want to hear from you.

So you can send a letter to Donnie Brooke.

Care of nine PBS.

Thirty six.

Fifty five.

Olive Street.

St.

Louis, Missouri.

Six three one zero eight.

Send an email to Donnie Brooke at nine PBS dot org or a tweet to hashtag STL.

Call us on the comment line.

Three one four five one two nine zero nine four.

And you can catch us anywhere.

You catch your favorite podcasts, including Sarah Fenske's three one four.

Three one four podcast and Bill McClellan is going to do a live show together.

So look out for that one on STL mag dot com.

Find us, too, at Donnie Brooke.

Last call a YouTube channel.

You can scan our little code right there and that will take you right to where you can find us and you can find us next on last call.

Thank you for sending in on this show, Sarah.

And we'll see you last call in just a minute or two.

Thank you for watching.

Donnie Brooke is made possible by the support of the Betsy and Thomas Patterson Foundation and the members of Nine PBS.