ST. LOUIS — A judge has put a hold on a city pilot program paying lower-income families $500 per month.
ºüÀêÊÓƵ Circuit Judge Joseph P. Whyte ruled late Thursday that critics challenging the program as an unconstitutional giveaway had made a convincing enough case to warrant a delay of this month’s scheduled payments to hundreds of households.
The 15-day pause opens the door to further arguments about whether the program, one of many across the country aimed at expanding public assistance, should be shut down entirely. That would be a significant blow for Mayor Tishaura O. Jones and progressive Democratic aldermen, who championed the program as a model for poverty-reduction efforts.
Jones said in a statement Friday that her administration would abide by the judge’s order.
“We are exploring our legal options,†Jones said, “and my administration continues to find every avenue possible to support the families of ºüÀêÊÓƵ City.â€
People are also reading…
Alderwoman Shameem Clark Hubbard, who carried the bill authorizing the program, was taken aback by the ruling. “That’s horrible,†she said.
Kimberley Mathis, attorney for the plaintiffs, could not immediately be reached for comment.
But Bevis Schock, an attorney with the legal group financing the lawsuit, welcomed the ruling. He said the program clearly violates prohibitions on public gifts to private individuals. And he dismissed critics who have said the lawsuit unfairly targets a program helping poor people while the city’s sports teams enjoy taxpayer help with stadium construction.
Both outlays are wrong, Schock said, and officials should stop them all. “In America,†he said, “each individual is responsible for his or her own life.â€
The $500-per-month program is ºüÀêÊÓƵ’ version of a concept that in recent years has cropped up in dozens of cities and counties across the country with progressive Democratic leaders looking to expand the social safety net.
The city started with a more limited version in 2021, sending one-time, $500 payments to more than 9,000 low-income households. Data on recipients’ spending that could be tracked via debit cards, where the money was deposited, found the most common expenses included groceries, utilities, restaurants and service stations — though more than a third of the money was converted to cash, rendering it untraceable.
Jones said the responses revealed a “deep need†for financial help among city residents, and pushed a new, longer-lasting plan through the Board of Aldermen in late 2022. When Jones signed the bill authorizing the program, which would send 540 lower-income families $500 per month for a year and a half, she called it “an investment directly in our communities still struggling to get back on their feet.â€
Aldermanic President Megan Green went further, calling it a step toward a universal program that would “help all ºüÀêÊÓƵans achieve a dignified, prosperous life.â€
The program began disbursing funds in the past year.
But last month, a former city Republican Party chairman and a substance abuse counselor at a local nonprofit sued to stop the program, citing a line in the state constitution barring local governments from granting public money or property to “any private individual.â€
The suit, financed by the Holy Joe Society, a group focused on government accountability, also argued the program runs afoul of a city rule prohibiting city officers from spending money except for “adequate consideration and efficient service to the City.â€
Andrew Wheaton, an attorney for the city, argued in court Monday that the program is exempt from such bans because it serves a public purpose: stabilizing poor households, helping people stay in their homes, and reducing the need for city spending on policing, medicine, and social services. Courts have granted exceptions for similar reasoning in the past.
Wheaton also said that even a temporary pause in the program would hurt people relying on the program to pay for basic necessities.
But the judge, in his order late Thursday putting a halt to the program, said Wheaton offered no evidence to support that warning.
The next hearing in the case is set for July 29.