East St. Louis Action Research Project
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
"…proposals to impose time limits on welfare and require work are
not grounded in the realities of the labor market. There are simply
not enough jobs available to employ the majority of welfare recipients….
These findings are a challenge to public policy makers who believe that
the welfare system can be reformed simply by requiring public aid recipients
This quotation, from a 1995 study entitled "Are There Enough Jobs: Welfare Reform and Labor Market Reality," undertaken by the Illinois Job Gap Project, highlights the issues that this report seeks to address. In East St. Louis, the study site for this report, the effects of welfare reform will be particularly devastating. Nearly 40 percent of the East St. Louis population received some kind of public assistance in 19902, and the community already suffers from several decades of decreasing population, growing poverty and unemployment, crumbling infrastructure and housing, and diminishing local job sources and services. Decreases in available public aid for single males in 1991 also exacerbated the city's problems.
In order for its workers to become more competitive in the current labor market, East St. Louis urgently needs to address the issues of increasing employability and improving job training provision. As Dr. Willie Epps, Director of Southern Illinois University's East St. Louis Center framed the problem during a recent interview conducted for this report, even if ten new industries were to locate in East St. Louis tomorrow, East St. Louis residents would not be prepared to take the available jobs. Mr. Bill Miller, Vice President for Human Resources at St. Mary's Hospital, stated during a similar interview that if $10 million were spent today on a new training job facility in East St. Louis, it would fail, because the necessary "expectations" among young residents have not yet been developed.
This report is a timely effort, due to recent welfare reform legislation,
in a community where "transfer payments," because of their prevalence,
are defined as a source of "basic income" in economic impact
models.3 It is also a logical next step, given the amount of
interest in employability issues and job training indicated in recent planning
documents produced by neighborhood-based organizations in East St. Louis.
The premise behind this report is that both job sources and employability
need to be increased in East St. Louis. Further, this report will demonstrate
that creating linkages between employment-related projects and physical
redevelopment are justified, and can positively leverage the outcomes of
both efforts. Issues relating to employability and job training will be
addressed, and a strategy that focuses on one job sector in particular,
the construction trades, will be proposed.
Several of the neighborhood-based organizations that exist in East St. Louis have undertaken strategic plans in recent years. These documents define comprehensive visions for the future of these neighborhoods, as well as outlining specific projects to undertake. Most of them mention the need to increase job opportunities within the city, and the need to provide increased job skills to residents.
The "Olivette Park Action Revitalization Plan", drafted in 1996, addresses the need for job training opportunities in the Olivette Park neighborhood, suggesting that programs targeting entertainment, the construction trades, and retail be developed. The Plan suggests that the Olivette Park Neighborhood Association, "in conjunction with interested local business owners, social service providers, and educational institutions… should establish a job-training council to design and implement a job-training strategy."4
The "Edgemont Neighborhood Improvement Plan" of 1995 included survey responses of neighborhood residents, indicating low levels of satisfaction with available job training resources. Over 35 percent of survey respondents felt that job training opportunities were "poor," and 22 percent felt they were "nonexistent," while only about 10 percent ranked them as "good" and just over 7 percent ranked them as "fair." The Plan went on to state that "the Edgemont Citizens for Crime Prevention and Community Development recognize that none of the long term objectives of the neighborhood plan can be achieved unless there is an improvement in education and job training opportunities for neighborhood residents."5
The "Lansdowne Neighborhood Improvement Plan" of 1992 states the following objectives related to local business and employment expansion: "To increase the level of business being conducted by area merchants; To assist local residents in securing available jobs within the Greater St. Louis Metropolitan Area; To help unemployed area residents create their own cooperatives to carry out work required by current community development plans; [and to] Research opportunities for expanding the number of East St. Louis-based businesses." The plan then suggests various activities that can support these objectives, including better distribution of job listings and training information, establishing commuting services to access jobs in Missouri, and encouraging the city of East St. Louis to hire local worker-owned cooperatives to do lot clean-ups, housing demolition, building rehabilitation and street repair. 6
The "Winstanley/Industry Park Neighborhood Improvement Plan", from 1992, includes a major objective that states: "Expand local business activity by aggressively pursuing small business assistance and job training programs."7
The "Emerson Park Neighborhood Improvement Plan", from 1991, contained similar suggestions regarding improving job listing services and job training awareness, as well as encouraging city support for worker-owned cooperatives. The document goes a step further in suggesting that the city "work with county, regional, state and federal government agencies to guarantee a fair number of jobs on any future public development project to Emerson Park residents."8
The "East St. Louis Consolidated Plan for 1995," drafted for the Department of Housing and Urban Development by the East St. Louis Community Development Block Grant office, notes that nearly every interview and public meeting conducted led to the conclusion that effort must be focused on "creation of more jobs and local businesses." Five industries are identified as feasible for the city to encourage through policy changes. They are: entertainment, culture and tourism; health services and home care; material re-use; advanced telecommunications; and construction trades.9
The "East St. Louis Enterprise Community Strategic Plan Summary,"
drafted in application for Enterprise Community status, reiterates the
points made in the HUD Consolidated Plan, and further states that "with
the major emphasis of this Strategic Plan being the total repair and improvement
of the area's infrastructure, we can anticipate the creation of large numbers
of jobs." In summarizing the "vision" of East St. Louis,
the document goes on to say: "Making the vision a reality requires
planning and programming which blends the physical, social and economic
aspects of renewal and recognizes their interdependence. Our goals are
not only to bring middle-income households to East St. Louis, but to empower
current residents with skills that enable them to cope with changing technological
and workplace demands. By making residents better trained and educated,
by increasing their representation in entrepreneurial activities and by
raising their purchasing power, the tax base of the city will become sufficient
to provide quality services."10
Not only has a "mandate" of sorts been established for pursuing
this topic, but three reasons for its increased relevance, in a larger
sense, are also important to note. In researching these topics, relevant
literature on the issues that face East St. Louis were found to be lacking,
and yet it has become a very important topic on the national agenda lately.
Given recent welfare reform, this concern will be addressed in the coming
years at all levels of government, likely resulting in new legislation
and potential new funding sources for innovative initiatives. Combined
with these two realities is the economic and social condition of East St.
Louis, which sits in the midst of a relatively stable and healthy metropolitan
area. In this community, a well-planned and coordinated strategy could
have a tremendous positive impact.
Limited Data Sources
Available literature on job training appears to be limited to general
critiques, and sparse documentation of specific successes, especially in
the area of construction skills training. What little relevant (and recent)
literature could be found on the topic is discussed in some detail in Chapters
Two, Three and Four. The problematic issue with much of what
has been published in regard to welfare-to-work initiatives and job training
is that it is either obviously tinged with the political ideology of the
authors, or the measures of success that were used are just as open to
debate as the results stated. In other words, studies of such complicated
issues as these can be designed to conclude what the author wishes
to conclude. While that is certainly not always the case, the ability to
compare results across studies is very difficult. These conflicts will
be discussed further, as appropriate, later in this report.
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-193), signed into law by President Clinton in late 1996, increases the urgency surrounding needed improvements in the employability of the low-skilled, especially welfare recipients. The new regulations radically alter the funding of welfare programs in order to save $54 billion over the next five years. Cash assistance responsibility has devolved almost entirely to the state level, with work requirements and a five-year lifetime limit imposed. In a radical departure from previous legislation, the new welfare bill eliminates the 61-year-old federal guarantee of cash assistance to those persons, even with children, who are unable to find work. Program structure is now up to the states to determine, and could result in a "race to the bottom", as states try to avoid having better benefits than neighboring states. In response to the new federal requirements, the Illinois Department of Public Aid has created a new program entitled Temporary Assistance to Families (TANF), which will replace AFDC on July 1, 1997. It includes a five-year lifetime limit for all families, with the exception of roughly 20 percent of eligible families, who have special circumstances. In addition, families whose youngest child is thirteen or older will be limited to two years of cash assistance if not employed.12 For many East St. Louis residents, "the clock is ticking" as of July 1, 1997.
President Clinton has proposed a federal agency initiative to hire welfare recipients, using a little-known regulation allowing the hiring of "worker trainees" without having to go through the standard Civil Service hiring process.13 He has urged the private sector to follow suit, and incentives in the form of tax credits or tax breaks to those who do hire welfare recipients are possible in the near future.
According to Marilyn Stringfellow of the East St. Louis Job Training
Partnership Act office, there is widespread denial about what welfare reform
will mean for dependent families, and some residents are even still unaware
of the new regulations. Willie Epps stated that reform will be "devastating"
to East St. Louis. Nolan Cheatham of the East St. Louis Department of Public
Aid office voiced a more hopeful reaction to reform in an interview conducted
for this report, saying that it was much needed, as public assistance programs
have long needed to create realistic "Joe Lunchbox" expectations
that will prepare people for real life situations. It is in this hopeful
spirit that this report was undertaken, to look critically at what can
be done to make a return to self-sufficiency possible for East St. Louis
residents currently dependent upon government aid, and to encourage those
Economic and Social Conditions in East St. Louis: A Comparison
The need for coordinated and wide-ranging redevelopment efforts in East St. Louis can be better understood when viewed in relationship to a neighboring community that has had a starkly different, and much more stable, history. For this reason, data for both East St. Louis and Belleville, as well as for St. Clair County as a whole, will be presented throughout this report. The information following provides an initial understanding of (and some perspective on) the economic and social infrastructure changes that have occurred in East St. Louis over the past few decades. Data relevant to employment patterns and the real estate market will be presented where appropriate in later chapters.
East St. Louis and Belleville are the two major population centers in St. Clair County, Illinois, immediately across the Mississippi River from St. Louis, Missouri. East St. Louis has direct river frontage, and Belleville sits further inland on higher ground. Belleville, or "beautiful city", was commissioned as the county seat in 1814, and received its city charter in 1850.14 In addition to being a political and judicial center, Belleville was an ideal location for manufacturing facilities, because coal was readily available from nearby mines. Early industry in Belleville included flour mills, stove foundries, beer breweries, brick works, glass works, shoe factories, and electricity production (from coal).
As manufactured products increased, the need to transport them to other markets did as well. Ferry service across the Mississippi was first established in 1819.15 By that year, a small community called Illinoistown had formed on the waterfront, and contained 125 houses and seventeen businesses.16 By 1837 a railroad had been built to bring goods down to the riverfront from the bluffs, and by 1840 four roads led to Illinoistown.17 After a devastating flood in 1844, a levee system was created and the swampy riverfront filled in to raise the area above flood stage. Illinoistown became a major transshipment point, with goods being sent down the river to New Orleans, and beyond to markets on the East Coast.
The years between 1850 and 1918 are now considered to have been the "golden age" of industry in the region. A sizable German and Irish immigrant population, as well as a large contingent of African-Americans, arrived in Illinoistown due to local manufacturing job opportunities. As the railroad system expanded, it focused on the riverfront transfer facilities at Illinoistown, and manufacturing enterprises both in the lowlands and on the bluffs flourished. During the Civil War, Illinoistown became a major troop and supply transfer point, and the railroad station began to be called "East St. Louis." That name was officially adopted when the city was chartered in 1865.18
In 1874, after nine years of construction, the Eads Bridge officially opened to directly link St. Louis and East St. Louis, followed quickly by two others.19 The National City Stockyards, just north of East St. Louis, became one of the nation's largest stockyards. During World War I, Scott Air Force Base was established near Belleville, and exists to this day.20
Belleville and East St. Louis, along with other nearby communities,
experienced phenomenal growth and prosperity during this period. The population
in East St. Louis mushroomed from around 15,000 in 1890 to over 75,000
in 1940, and peaked at nearly 83,000 in 1950.21 As A. Doyne
Horsley describes it, "During the Golden era, the American Bottoms
had almost everything a large, heavy-manufacturing area could want. No
other area around St. Louis could offer the combination of large tracts
of inexpensive flatland, near the center of a major city and an extensive
railroad concentration, accessible to unlimited quantities of usable water,
[with] a growing labor supply, [and] a wide range of materials nearby (especially
bituminous coal for fuel), only twenty miles by railcar from the industrial
Population, Income and Employers
While Belleville has continued to grow slowly but steadily, East St. Louis has diminished in size and wealth significantly since 1950. What factors have caused the dramatic downturn of East St. Louis, while simultaneously allowing Belleville to remain a stable community? A number of external influences that have plagued many industrial cities have contributed to the decline of East St. Louis. After 1950, as interstate highways were built throughout the United States, direct access to manufacturing areas further inland was provided. As the automobile and the truck freight industry began to overtake railroad use, East St. Louis was not well situated to take advantage of the transition. It became generally less important to locate near producers of coal, as centralized producers of cheap electricity were coming to the fore. Additionally, many of the major manufacturers in the area managed to escape municipal tax burdens and pollution regulations by incorporating themselves as self-contained communities. As a result, many of the area manufacturers employed East St. Louis residents, but never directly contributed business or property taxes to the city, and left behind significant environmental problems after they relocated. Between 1961 and 1980, East St. Louis experienced a loss of over 13,000 industrial jobs.23
Belleville, by contrast, has maintained stability because its economy has historically been more diversified than that of East St. Louis. It is the county seat, and its proximity to Scott Air Force Base provides a steady government employment source. Also, manufacturing enterprises were located within city limits, allowing for collection of taxes in proportion to the physical burdens placed on the municipality. While Belleville has had problems with pollution left from former coal strip mining operations, and from subsidence caused by deterioration of former coal shaft mines under residential areas, overall it has fared the transition to a highway-oriented economy far better than East St. Louis. Belleville also stands to benefit when a new civilian airport is built in conjunction with Scott Air Force Base.
East St. Louis has experienced a significant population decline since 1950, with a population just over 40,000 in 1990, while Belleville has seen a steady and manageable increase from around 32,000 to around 42,000 over the same period (see Table 1 in Appendix C). Over the same interval, the average number of persons per household has decreased in Belleville, likely signaling a decrease in average number of children per household. In East St. Louis, this number has held steady at just over three (see Table 2 in Appendix C).
Median family income has declined precipitously in East St. Louis over the same period (see Table 3 in Appendix C), resulting in an increasing divergence over time between consumer purchasing power in East St. Louis relative to Belleville and the rest of the county as a whole. Median family income in East St. Louis is now less than half that of Belleville, which at nearly $34,000 is just above the county-wide median. Table 4 (in Appendix C) indicates the startling increase in percentage of population living below the poverty level in East St. Louis, to nearly 40 percent in 1990. Belleville has remained very steady at under 6 percent below the poverty line during the past two decades, lower even than the county-wide average. An increase in percentage of "non-white population" in East St. Louis, to over 98 percent in 1990, has mirrored this change in poverty level (see Table 5 in Appendix C). Belleville has held steady over the long term on this statistic also, at under one percent non-white.
It should be noted that while 39.2 percent of East St. Louis residents received "public assistance" in 1990 as compared to only 5.2 percent of Belleville residents, numbers of Social Security recipients are much closer, at 30.6 percent and 34.6 percent respectively.24 This is partly explained by the fact that East St. Louis has a lower median age than Belleville, under 28 years versus over 35 years (see Table 6 in Appendix C).
In its heyday, East St. Louis had nearly four times as many manufacturing
establishments, more than twice as many wholesale establishments, nearly
six times as many retail outlets, and over three times as many service
providers as it has today (see Table 7 in Appendix C). Belleville,
by contrast, has lost only fourteen of its manufacturing establishments,
and has seen a steady increase in the number of wholesalers, retailers
and service providers. East St. Louis residents today are forced to do
much of their shopping outside of East St. Louis, benefiting the tax coffers
of other communities, because a critical number of consumers with adequate
income does not currently exist to sustain a retail and service sector
within the city itself.
A review of city revenues and expenditures (Table 8 in Appendix C) also serves to indicate that East St. Louis has not kept pace with Belleville, or the county overall, in the level of revenue collection increases. East St. Louis has acquired a reputation for poorly managed city finances over the years, as a result of attempts to operate at a deficit, due to both lack of an adequate commercial tax base and the flight of the middle class after 1950. The city very nearly went bankrupt in the 1980s, and was forced to restructure its debt, ask for state assistance, and accept state oversight of all city finances. East St. Louis continues to struggle with a tax base inadequate to provide adequate city services and infrastructure repair. For a period of time during the 1980s, city services, including garbage pickup, were discontinued. City residents continue to bear the burden of that period in the form of illegally dumped refuse and dangerous structures that have not yet been removed.
Data regarding selected federal funding in fiscal 1994 (Table 9 in Appendix C) provides a snapshot view of the level of federal support received by the two communities. As might be expected, the table indicates that far more federal money earmarked for housing and community development flows into East St. Louis than into Belleville. However, it is interesting to note that more direct housing assistance was collected in Belleville than in East St. Louis during that year. It should be noted that this data measures only the total amount made available to the communities, not the effectiveness with which it was utilized.
Table 10 (in Appendix C) includes various statistics on
local government spending in both communities during fiscal 1992. Only
slightly more is spent per capita in East St. Louis, a large portion of
which is funding from outside sources, as seen above. Belleville spent
virtually no funds on housing and community development in that year, whereas
this expenditure category made up a significant portion of the East St.
Louis city budget. Again, no effectiveness measure regarding funds used
is provided. Information on debt expenditures likely reflect state repayment
of much of East St. Louis' past debt in exchange for continuing state financial
The Housing Market
Reflecting the decrease in median family income over time, and the percentage of residents below the poverty level, home ownership rates have decreased in East St. Louis over the past four decades, although they showed a slight rebound in the last decade from 49.4 percent to 50.5 percent (see Table 11 in Appendix C). However, over the same period, home ownership rates in Belleville have decreased by a larger margin. What has caused these trends is hard to speculate, but what is important to note is that the rate in Belleville still sits well above that of East St. Louis (61.3 percent versus 50.5 percent). Further illuminating erosion in the stability of the housing market over time in East St. Louis is Table 12 (in Appendix C), which shows median value of owner-occupied housing in East St. Louis falling only slightly behind the county average in 1950, but significantly below it in 1990. Redlining practices, and the widespread use of land contract ("bond-for-deed") sales tactics have exacerbated these value declines. Belleville, by contrast, with its stable middle class population, shows median values keeping pace with and consistently exceeding the county average.
Median rents over the same period show less of a stark contrast, which
may be caused by a difference in apartment sizes and types in the two communities
(see Table 13 in Appendix C). Those potential differences are
not demonstrated here. Rental properties in East St. Louis are more likely
to be older, larger units. Belleville almost certainly has newer apartment
complexes geared towards a more varied market, probably including smaller
units. Additionally, East St. Louis rents are affected by a limited marketplace,
in which a small number of landlords have engaged in unscrupulous business
practices, due to a lack of competition. Renters in East St. Louis are
rarely "getting what they pay for."
Another aspect of "perceived" quality of life is the amount of crime in a community. It is interesting to note that, in recent years, crime rates have actually decreased in East St. Louis (see Table 14 in Appendix C), and yet the perception persists that East St. Louis is as crime-ridden and dangerous a place as ever. Belleville is perceived as a quiet, safe community, and yet crime rates have increased there over the past two decades. Mass media in the region feeds these perceptions, focusing on negative stories and images of East St. Louis, thus playing to the "fears" of regional residents. Belleville has taken steps over the years, both literally and figuratively, to distance itself from East St. Louis for this reason.
Many of the factors that enhance the quality of life in a community, that secure property values and tax revenues, and that lure potential employers are currently missing in East St. Louis. A recovery is starting to happen physically in East St. Louis, however, and there is an opportunity to mesh "human capital" improvements with these physical changes, given the city's central location in Metro-East region.
These conditions further reinforce the need for a study of this kind. A combination of factors has led to the opportunity to address comprehensively the issues of employability and training needs, and to gain regional, and even more far-reaching, support for locally generated and inventive improvements.
This study has two major components: a search for and review of objective data and critical literature, and a series of interviews with local and regional educators, social service providers, and public and private sector administrators.
As previously mentioned, critical literature on these topics was sorely lacking, but what was located is reviewed in later chapters intermittently with data and interview results. Census and other data sources were collected, allowing for an analysis of supply and demand factors, community needs, and the real estate market and construction industry in the Metro-East region. These data are interspersed through Chapters Two, Three and Four. Given the dearth of objective data available, and given the need to assess the level of interest in coordinated revitalization efforts within the community, much of the information presented was collected through direct interviewing.
The series of interviews was conducted with persons associated in various professional and personal capacities with the issue of employment and job training needs in East St. Louis (see Appendix A). Initial interviewees were chosen based on recommendations from various sources, collected randomly. There was no attempt made to "balance" public sector and private sector input, or to use any other initial criteria. These interviews took place at the offices or homes of the interviewees, after their involvement was solicited by phone. Interviews lasted anywhere from thirty minutes to ninety minutes, and were conducted between late January and late March of 1997. All interviews were designed to obtain informants' spontaneous identification and assessment of issues before the interviewer's agenda was introduced.
Those who were interviewed early on in the process and those who were not either residents of, or employed in, East St. Louis were asked a variety of questions that related directly to their focused perspective on the regional labor market and/or job training issues, as appropriate. General feedback received in these unstructured interviews is included in the following analysis, as many of the comments made by these interviewees reflect responses to questions similar to the structured questions asked of those more systematically interviewed.
More structured "surveys" were conducted with interviewees who live and/or work in East St. Louis itself, dealing with issues of employability and job training in a direct way with East St. Louis residents. Interviews were structured through the use of a list of twenty-three open-ended questions to guide the discussion (see Appendix B for the full list of questions). Progressing from the general to the specific, these questions sought feedback on general employability barriers facing East St. Louis residents, promising employment sectors in the region, level of general knowledge about training resources available to East St. Louis residents, and whether or not current training opportunities are sufficient. The questions then progressed to the issue of construction trades, and whether there is a perceived demand for training opportunities in the trades. Interviewees were asked whether or not current trades training existed, and in what form. Also, they were asked more specific questions about the implementation of such a program; how should it be funded, who should administer it, who should be targeted to participate, and so on. Toward the end of the interview, the "recycler" model (to be described in Chapter Four) was presented as a potential model and initial responses recorded. Finally, interviewees were asked to identify others they knew personally or professionally who should also be contacted regarding this topic (later interview contacts were based somewhat on suggestions from early interviewees). Not all interviewees were asked each question, as some became redundant based on extended answers to earlier questions. If interviewees went off "on tangents" they were allowed to speak freely.
In all, twenty-three interviews were conducted during this phase of research. Eleven were unstructured discussions, and twelve were open-ended question "surveys." Appendix A lists all interviewees, along with date interviewed, and their position and contact information.
As a result of gaining direct feedback, the strategy that will be proposed
was not designed "in a vacuum", and is directly based on community
feedback, relevant economic and social data, and lessons already learned.
As has been mentioned previously, critical literature is lacking, so the
proposed strategy relies more on local feedback and lessons than on outside
sources of objective data.
This report seeks to address, at a basic level, several general questions: What are the issues that confound employability for East St. Louis residents? What job training resources are currently available, and what resources should be made available? How can East St. Louis residents be better served? And, is creating construction skills training a worthwhile endeavor? In other words, this report hopes to "demystify" a popular belief that construction skills training is a panacea for disinvested and struggling communities.
In a broader sense, the following three questions will be addressed:
How can East St. Louis more effectively create and utilize job training resources, in the face of welfare reform?
How can East St. Louis exploit pending construction opportunities to create training and jobs?
How can East St. Louis effectively link job training efforts to community rebuilding in a comprehensive sense?
The next three chapters will focus on the three main aspects
of the survey, roughly in order of the questioning, and cover in detail
the feedback and research on the three general topics of employability,
job training, and construction skills training, respectively.
Chapter Five summarizes the findings on the first two topics and
offer general recommendations. Chapter Six summarizes the
findings on the third topic, makes specific recommendations, and
concludes with the presentation of a specific proposal to provide construction
skills training, the "Building Opportunities" strategy.
In so doing, this report provides both basic background information,
general suggestions, and a concrete direction to those entities
wishing to coordinate their efforts to provide job training for East St.
Louis residents, while directly involving them in a meaningful way in the
CHAPTER ONE NOTES:
1. Carlson, Virginia L., Nikolas C. Theodore. "Are There Enough Jobs?: Welfare Reform and Labor Market Reality". Illinois Job Gap Project, Woods Fund, Chicago. self-published. December 1995. pages 7-8.
2. 1990 Census data.
3. Discussion with Mike Cordes, deputy director of Business and Economic Development, East St. Louis, in March 1997.
4. "Olivette Park Action Revitalization Plan". master's thesis; authors: Angelica Morgan, Patricia Nolan, Eric Stoller. Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. June 1996.
5. "Edgemont Neighborhood Improvement Plan". prepared in cooperation with Edgemont Citizens for Crime Prevention and Community Control. master's thesis; authors: Ricardo Andres Alarcon, Damon Yancy Smith. Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. May 1995.
6. "Lansdowne Neighborhood Improvement Plan". Summer Program in Urban Planning and Design, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. April 1992.
7. "Winstanley/Industry Park Community Development Block Grant Proposal: 1992-1993". Winstanley/Industry Park Neighborhood Organization, East St. Louis, IL.. 1992.
8. "Emerson Park Neighborhood Improvement Plan". Project report for UP374/394, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Fall 1990.
9. "East St. Louis Consolidated Plan for 1995: Executive Summary". Office of Community Planning and Development, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington DC. (http://www.hud.gov/cpes/il/eaststil.html)
10. "East St. Louis Enterprise Community: Strategic Plan Summary". U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington DC. (http://www.hud.gov/cpd/ezec/il/ilestlou.html)
11. General information in this section is based on a MillerComm lecture by Mary Jo Bane, former assistant secretary for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, given in Champaign, Illinois on March 14, 1997.
12. "Group seeks additional $50 million for welfare plan". East St. Louis Journal. March 5, 1997. page 1.
13. 'Welfare recipients may get federal jobs". Chicago Tribune. March 9, 1997. section 1, page 3.
14. St. Clair Bicentennial Commission. "Tapestry of Time: A History of St. Clair County, Illinois, In Pictures". Page 47.
15. St. Clair Bicentennial Commission. "Tapestry of Time: A History of St. Clair County, Illinois, In Pictures". Page 5.
16. St. Clair Bicentennial Commission. "Tapestry of Time: A History of St. Clair County, Illinois, In Pictures". Page 99.
17. St. Clair Bicentennial Commission. "Tapestry of Time: A History of St. Clair County, Illinois, In Pictures". Page 99.
18. St. Clair Bicentennial Commission. "Tapestry of Time: A History of St. Clair County, Illinois, In Pictures". Page 100.
19. St. Clair Bicentennial Commission. "Tapestry of Time: A History of St. Clair County, Illinois, In Pictures". Page 100.
20. St. Clair Bicentennial Commission. "Tapestry of Time: A History of St. Clair County, Illinois, In Pictures". Page 8.
21. St. Clair Bicentennial Commission. "Tapestry of Time: A History of St. Clair County, Illinois, In Pictures". Page 104.
22. Horsley, A. Doyne. "Illinois: A Geography". Page 135.
23. St. Clair Bicentennial Commission. "Tapestry of Time: A History of St. Clair County, Illinois, In Pictures". Page 108.
24. 1990 Census data.
: Diane Gormery-Barnes
HTML by : Yong Wook Kim
Last modified: May 21, 1997
St. Louis Action Research Project