Shortly before the Christmas holiday, officials with St. Paul Planning and Economic Development made the case that a developer should receive nearly $3 million in tax incentives to demolish the three buildings at the northeast corner of Grand Avenue and Victoria Street and replace them with a six-story, mixed-use apartment building.

The St. Paul City Council agreed, voting 5-1 to greenlight Afton Park Development’s plans to tear down the Victoria Crossing East Mall, the former home of the Billy’s on Grand restaurant and a neighboring rental house. In their place will rise a 90-unit market-rate apartment building with more than 12,800 square feet of ground-level restaurants and retail, as well as a level of underground parking.

It’s the type of development some housing and small-business advocates have longed for to expand the city’s tax base and bring more foot traffic to Grand.

“We have the option to not grow or we have the option to grow,” said St. Paul City Council President Rebecca Noecker at the time. “We haven’t seen a completely unsubsidized housing development in St. Paul in a long time. A third-party review found there was a (financial) gap, and the amount of the gap is what we’re allowing.”

Grand Avenue blighted?

Still, even some fans of the project were left scratching their heads.

To grant the developer $2.96 million from a new $9.4 million, 26-year tax increment financing district, state statute required city officials to prove the site was blighted, and that the $44.6 million project would be unlikely to move forward but for public assistance.

Grand Avenue? Blighted? Long celebrated as arguably the city’s toniest small-business district, the avenue has suffered its share of vacant commercial buildings. However, they remain surrounded by bustling boutique shops, restaurants, cafes and apartment buildings, as well as high-end homes on adjoining streets.

Events such as Grand Old Day and the St. Paul Winter Carnival Grande Day Parade draw fans and vendors to Grand from miles away, and a cigar store, a children’s bookshop, multiple bakeries and the Golden Fig Fine Foods gourmet grocer are among the independently owned destinations that add to its appeal.

The Victoria Crossing building on the corner of Grand Ave. and Victoria St. in St. Paul on Thursday, Dec, 19, 2025. (John Autey / Pioneer Press)

58 TIF districts citywide

The city currently captures 7% of its annual tax capacity for TIF spending, or about $37 million last year, in 58 TIF districts.

That’s raised concerns that financial incentives intended to lure developers to blighted areas are being overused to the point they’re almost an automatic giveaway, even when a property and its surrounding area are not in especially bad condition.

“It’s a seductive tool that a lot of constituencies are going to say, ‘It’s going to increase the tax base,’ which it does not for 25 years,” said Summit Avenue resident Robert Muschewske, a retired management consultant and member of the fiscal watchdog group Insight St. Paul, which opposed the TIF award. “To what degree does a development meet a clear public purpose that it merits a subsidy? Given the location, why does it need a public subsidy at all?”

Developer Ari Parritz has said the new building will increase the site’s $6.5 million value by $20 million. Existing property taxes, which equal roughly $200,000, will continue to flow into the city, county and school district general fund. Over the course of 26 years, the tax increment above that amount will fund the $9.4 million TIF district, including the developer’s $2.96 million pay-as-you-go financial note and $3 million for off-site affordable housing.

The city, in effect, loses nothing financially compared to the status quo, he said, and gains new housing and refreshed storefronts, as well as off-site affordable units, instead of an aging mall. Within Paper Source, the last retail tenant to leave the mall on Jan. 15, tarps were set out in multiple areas to capture falling water during recent snow melt. Even from the exterior, the house neighboring the property shows obvious deterioration, from rotted wood to a sloping front porch.

“This isn’t about Grand Avenue being blighted, or even the intersection being a blighted corner,” explained Parritz, who lives in St. Paul. “It’s literally about the physical infrastructure of the particular buildings. Anyone who doesn’t believe me is welcome to go in and take a look.”

Related Articles

Your Money: Markets were up in 2025, will it continue?

Working Strategies: Hiring bonuses can come with caveats

Job titles are out and skills are in, Wharton expert says. Here’s what employers want to see

US producer prices rose 0.5% in December, more than expected, on uptick in services inflation

Warsh’s challenge: Navigating Fed independence and Trump’s demands

Three ‘structurally substandard’ buildings

City staff have justified the creation of the $9 million TIF district based on two reports commissioned by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority — a financial analysis from Ehlers Public Finance Advisors and a building inspection and repair-or-replacement analysis from LHB, a Minneapolis-based architectural, engineering and planning firm.

Muschewske, who said he was a regular customer at the Victoria Crossing East Mall, noted he attended a Planning Commission meeting in November to review whether the proposed TIF district was in keeping with the city’s Comprehensive Plan, where it was supported by a close vote of 6-5, and neither report was made publicly available at the time.

In fact, city Planning and Economic Development released both reports to him at the end of December, weeks after the city council had already approved the new TIF district.

“This process needs to be improved,” he said. “There’s no public opportunity to weigh in with any substantive input.”

In a Dec. 10 presentation to the city council, city staff noted that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority had retained LHB “to complete an assessment of the property to determine if the statutory blight test has been met.”

The LHB report, which was published for the city in October, did not specifically use the term “blight.” It did use the criteria allowed by state statute to greenlight new TIF districts — that the buildings were “structurally substandard.” The state defines substandard buildings as those where repair costs to bring a site up to building codes would exceed 15% of the cost of a full structure replacement, not counting energy improvements.

The report estimated that replacing the three buildings with comparable construction would cost about $4.7 million, compared to needed improvements totaling $1.36 million, much of it related to roofing, lighting, HVAC and windows. In other words, code repairs would equal 29% of replacement costs, which is well above the state’s 15% threshold.

The LHB report runs to 56 pages with appendixes, photos and a line-item by line-item description of repair and replacement costs for each building. By statute, at least 50% of the structures would have to be deemed substandard “to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance,” and LHB’s Aug. 13 inspection found that 100% of the buildings fit the description.

The Ehlers report and ‘but for’ test

To justify new TIF districts, Minnesota also requires a “but for” test, which means the project would not occur but for a TIF subsidy.

Based on current market conditions, the $44.6 million project would bring a return on investment of 6.02% without TIF assistance, or 6.8% with TIF financing attached, according to the Ehlers report. “In the current market, developers typically need a … yield on cost of at least 7% for financial feasibility,” reads their report. “Based on this, we conclude TIF assistance is warranted for the project.”

The three-page financial analysis from Minneapolis-based Ehlers found that a mortgage loan would cover $28.5 million of the $44.6 million project cost. Equity, or cash and investor stakes, would cover another $12.8 million, and a state grant would cover $350,000.

The project’s total development cost works out to be about $495,000 per housing unit, which “is not uncommon for small projects located on core city infill sites,” reads the report. Even with housing rents of $3.83 per square foot, “which is at the upper end of the market, but appropriate for the location,” the $2.96 million gap remains, unless it’s filled by additional assistance, according to Ehlers.

Muschewske said he and other members of an Insight St. Paul subcommittee focused on TIF spending met with the developer, Parritz, who had previously helped another firm develop the Kenton House, which also added luxury apartments above restaurants to a nearby site on Grand Avenue.

“The developer seems to be a reasonable guy,” Muschewske said. “He developed something down the street successfully without the use of TIF. He claims he was able to do that because interest rates were lower during COVID. But it’s not clear why taxpayers should be on the hook to provide him his investment return.”

‘A sweet opportunity’

Parritz said St. Paul has used TIF sparingly for market-rate housing, which has largely stalled throughout the city. Without an infusion of both public and private dollars, the Grand-Victoria site would remain underutilized.

The Gather Eatery and Bar, the restaurant that came after Billy’s on Grand, closed in January 2025, leaving a large vacant commercial space.

“I wish the public could focus more on creating better tools, instead of blasting the only ones we have that can make an actual difference,” Parritz said.

“The only market-rate housing TIF has been applied to in our city is (downtown) Landmark Tower and, depending upon how you spin it, Highland Bridge, where market-rate housing is supporting affordable housing,” he added. “I continue to talk to investors who are ruling out St. Paul for anything because it’s St. Paul — regulation, politics, rent control, you name it. But things are definitely getting better. … We have a sweet opportunity to get some things going, but we’re still dealing with investor sentiment that has accumulated over decades.”

Construction of the new building is anticipated to start in February and run to the summer of 2027.

Related Articles

St. Paul police investigating fatal Saturday shooting

Joe Soucheray: Even the country’s best water needs to breathe sometimes

Here’s what a federal indictment alleges about 9 people charged in St. Paul church protest

Mary Ellen Klas: Republican governors are starting to understand the assignment

St. Paul: Customs and Border Protection employee charged with DWI

There are three kinds of people: Those who are completely tapped into the popular music of the Grammys; those who use it as a crash course in modern pop; and those who could not care less and will be doing something else on Sunday night.

There are also those who are looking to be outraged about something, but whatever.

If you’re tuning in on Sunday, this year’s ceremony marks the 68th annual Grammys and there will be a lot more than trophies handed out. The performer list is kept under wraps, but is likely to include such top nominees as Kendrick Lamar, Lady Gaga, Bad Bunny, Billie Eilish, Bruno Mars and Sabrina Carpenter.

Comedian Trevor Noah will host the show for the sixth consecutive time, and also the last time. The four-time Grammy nominee is also up for best audio book, narration and storytelling for the children’s story “Into The Uncut Grass.” His competition includes a Supreme Court justice (Ketanji Brown Jackson), the Dalai Lama and a member of Milli Vanilli, so that’s a wild one.

A lot of interesting awards — ones with real musicians — are handed out before prime time in the premiere ceremony at 3:30 p.m. ET on the Recording Academy’s YouTube channel and on live.grammy.com.

The main show will air live on CBS beginning at 8 p.m. Here’s a look at some Grammy storylines:

1. Kendrick’s record-breaking run

The rapper leads the field with nine nominations, putting him in a good spot to become the most Grammy-decorated hip-hop artist of all time. Jay-Z currently tops that list with 25 wins, followed by his former friend and collaborator Kanye at 24. The Kanye total, incidentally, hasn’t moved since he won best rap song with Jay-Z in 2022 for the single “Jail” and best melodic rap performance for “Hurricane.” For whatever reason, Kanye’s 2025 single “Heil Hitler” was not nominated.

In November 2024, a few months before headlining the Super Bowl halftime show, Lamar surprise-released a sixth album, “GNX” (named after his 1987 Buick Grand National Experimental), that topped the charts and landed Top 5 in numerous year-end best-of lists.

Last year, he swept all five of the categories he was nominated in, including his first two wins in the top categories of record of the year and song of the year for his Drake diss track “Not Like Us.”

2. Album of the year is a wide open

Bad Bunny performs during the iHeartRadio Music Awards in Los Angeles on March 17, 2025. (AP Photo/Chris Pizzello)

The last 10 winners have been Taylor Swift (thrice), Beyonce, Harry Styles, Jon Batiste, Billie Eilish, Kacey Musgraves, Bruno Mars and Adele.

None of them are in the picture this year in a category where someone is going to win their first album of the year award. Lady Gaga and Kendrick will get their fifth crack at it — Kendrick now having had five consecutive AOTY nominations.

Only two rap albums have won it — Lauryn Hill’s “The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill” (1999) and Outkast’s “Speakerboxxx/The Love Below” (2004) — so this would also be the first win for a solo male rapper.

Gaga and Kendrick will compete with Bad Bunny (second time), Justin Bieber (third time), and first-timers Sabrina Carpenter, Tyler, the Creator, Leon Thomas and Clipse (Pusha T & Malice).

3. Gaga watch

Lady Gaga performs during her free concert on Copacabana Beach in Rio de Janeiro, Saturday, May 3, 2025. (AP Photo/Silvia Izquierdo)

Speaking of Gaga, despite her 14 prior Grammys and status as a pop culture icon, she has never scored a win in one of the major categories: album, song or record of the year.

This year, the singer-songwriter is nominated in all three with “Abracadabra” (record and song) and “Mayhem” (album). Her wins, including two with Tony Bennett and three with Bradley Cooper, have all been in the pop and visual media categories.

As a reminder, song of the year is a songwriter’s award.

4. Best new artist leans Dean

This once-derided category — it was won by Starland Vocal Band and Milli Vanilli — now belongs to the ladies, who swept the last eight in a row and are likely to make it nine.

The prediction platform Kalshi gives Olivia Dean about a 70% chance of winning, with Leon Thomas and Alex Warren a distant second and third. Dean — a British R&B/neosoul singer who has a touch of Sade to her tone and a maturity beyond her 26 years — released her second album, “The Art of Loving,” last year and was in Pittsburgh in October to open for Sabrina Carpenter.

In the unlikely event of a Katseye upset, it would become the first all “girl group” to win the best new artist Grammy.

Also nominated are the Marías, Addison Rae, sombr and Lola Young.

5. K-pop and Spanish breakthroughs

Bad Bunny, who will headline the upcoming Super Bowl halftime show, is in the running for Album (“DeBÍ TiRAR MáS FOToS”) Record and Song of the Year (“DTMF”) — marking only the second time an all-Spanish-language project has been nominated in these top slots.

Meanwhile, Rosé and “KPop Demon Hunters” are the first K-pop acts nominated in the Grammys’ general field categories, with Rosé’s collaboration “APT.” and the “KPop Demon Hunters” hit “Golden” both in contention for song of the year and record of the year.

6. Let there be rock

No one seems to care about rock anymore — except the people who pack arenas and stadiums.

Unlike the top categories, rock has an interesting blend of young blood (Turnstile, Wet Leg, Yungblud) and grizzled veterans (Nine Inch Nails, the Cure, Deftones).

The Cure, which has never won a Grammy, is nominated for the first time in 24 years, for “Songs of a Lost World” (best alternative album) along with best alternative music performance for “Alone.”

Turnstile, one of the best bands to break out this decade, has five nominations and is the first band to be nominated across rock, metal and alternative categories in the same year.

The Kalshi favorite in alternative rock categories is Hayley Williams, the Paramore frontwoman who released her third solo album, “Ego Death at a Bachelorette Party,” in 2025.

The site also favors first-time nominee Yungblud to win best rock performance for his cover of “Changes” from the Back to the Beginning concert that honored Ozzy Osbourne and Black Sabbath. It would be a sentimental choice, for sure.

7. Father vs. son

This likely won’t get much attention in the broadcast, but there is a father-son showdown in the newly added category best traditional country album.

Willie Nelson is nominated for his 77th album, “Oh What a Beautiful World,” and his son Lukas, of Lukas Nelson & Promise of the Real, is nominated for his solo debut “American Romance.”

Asked about being up against his legendary dad, Lukas told the Los Angeles Times, “‘Against’ is a strong word. ‘Alongside’ is better. I mean, the Nelsons have a 40% chance of winning, which is pretty good.”

The only prior example of a father and son being nominated in the same category for separate projects was in 1998, when Julio Iglesias and his son Enrique Iglesias were both nominated for Best Latin Pop Album.

That Grammy went to Luis Miguel for “Romances.”

8. Return of the cover

The other new category is best album cover, which is actually making a comeback.

At the inaugural Grammys in 1959, this award went to the artists behind the moody “Frank Sinatra Sings for Only the Lonely.”

Then, the Academy made it complicated. From 1962 to 1965, the award split into classical and non-classical albums. Then, from 1966 to 1968, it split into graphic arts and photography subcategories, before going back to best album cover in 1969.

Of all the iconic rock album covers, only three have ever won: The Beatles’ “Revolver” and “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club” and “Bob Dylan’s Greatest Hits.”

In 1974, it became best album packaging — thus de-emphasizing the cover — and in 1994 it became best recording package.

The first to win best album cover since 1973 will be either the artists behind Tyler, the Creator’s “CHROMAKOPIA,” Bad Bunny’s “Debí Tirar Más Fotos,” Djo’s “The Crux,” Perfume Genius’ “Glory” or Wet Leg’s “Moisturizer.”

9. Mac artistry

The ’26 Grammy slate is short on Pittsburgh connections. No Dan + Shay, no Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra, no Code Orange (still on hiatus) and no Mac Miller.

Sort of.

There are two competing nominees in best recording package related to the late Pittsburgh rap star: art directors Bráulio Amado and Alim Smith are nominated for the posthumous release “Balloonerism”; and Mac’s brother, Miller McCormick, is up for “The Spins” (Picture Disc Vinyl).

Mac was nominated for one Grammy for a project he worked on personally, for 2018’s “Swimming,” but never won one. It would be pretty wild if his brother did.

10. People you know

The main categories have a lot of young star power. It’s in the Lifetime Achievement Awards where the legends get some stage time.

The Grammys will be honoring Paul Simon (a 16-time Grammy winner), Carlos Santana (a 10-time winner), Chaka Khan (10), Cher (1) and the late Whitney Houston (6) and Fela Kuti, the first African musician to win a Lifetime Achievement Grammy.

They will also honor Pharrell Williams, who began his career in 1992 as part of the production team The Neptunes, with the Dr. Dre Global Impact Award. Black Music Icon Awards will go to Brandy and Kirk Franklin.

Related Articles

Movie review: Rachel McAdams, Dylan O’Brien shine in Sam Raimi’s gonzo blast ‘Send Help’

Hudson Hot Air Affair set to return Feb. 6-8

Macaulay Culkin, Meryl Streep and more pay tribute to Catherine O’Hara, who died at 71

The Westminster dog show is turning 150. Here’s what has — and hasn’t — changed over time

Review: Bruce Springsteen, Tom Morello and friends rock First Ave for anti-ICE benefit

For those who think about politics in terms of ideology and rigid categories, the extraordinary events in Venezuela pose an uncomfortable question: what is the morally correct position to take in a drama this complex?

Some celebrate Nicolás Maduro’s removal simply because he was a brutal dictator. They’re largely indifferent to the violation of international law that the U.S. committed to seize him (this is the majority view among Venezuelans).

Others, mostly focused on U.S. politics, couldn’t care less about Maduro but recoil at President Donald Trump’s deployment of military forces in South America on dubious grounds, without congressional approval and with the familiar whiff of yet another nation-building experiment. Radical leftists oppose the intervention on principle and, not coincidentally, mourn the disappearance of Maduro’s absurd socialist proclamations (these die-hard anti-imperialists seem to have multiplied in the Trump era).

Finally, a more cynical camp marvels at the stark U.S. display of power while feeling no obligation to clean up the mess Venezuela has become.

Not only defensible, but coherent

The hardest position to defend belongs to those who feel genuine gratitude that Maduro is finally facing consequences but also recognize that the U.S. cannot simply roam the globe abducting leaders the White House dislikes. In today’s polarized climate, holding both seemingly contradictory thoughts at once can feel agonizing. I’ve already had more than a few arguments with friends about this and they rarely end well. If you’ve followed the flood of commentary on Venezuela in recent weeks, you’ve likely encountered compelling, rational arguments justifying both sides — just not at the same time.

But fear not. With a bit of perspective, this position is not only defensible; it is coherent.

It is entirely possible to support what the U.S. did in Maduro’s specific case while remaining deeply skeptical of similar interventions elsewhere and fully aware of Washington’s self-interest. And it is perfectly consistent to support the cause of a free and democratic Venezuela led by the U.S. without tying it to whatever one happens to think about Trump and his predatory foreign policy.

Some historical recap is necessary to explain this.

Hollowed out by Chavez’s socialist project

Venezuela isn’t just another troubled country; it is a tragedy on a scale Latin America hasn’t seen in generations. Not long ago one of the region’s richest nations, it was hollowed out by the Chavista socialist project. The economy collapsed, with GDP shrinking by nearly 80% since 2012, while its once-almighty oil industry fell apart. Such outcomes are typically associated with wars. An estimated 8 million Venezuelans fled the country. Thousands were jailed as an increasingly authoritarian government crushed dissent.

To buy political cover, Maduro granted privileged access to foreign powers, from Cuba to Iran, and cultivated ties with terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah, further destabilizing the region. Russia even built an ammunition plant in Venezuela to produce cartridges for Kalashnikov rifles. Chavistas were not particularly concerned about sovereignty back then.

Over the years, there were multiple attempts to correct course: mass protests that were brutally repressed, government-opposition dialogues, international mediation led by independent actors such as Norway and Qatar, economic and political sanctions and the ill-fated experiment of a parallel government under Juan Guaidó.

The last real chance for a peaceful transfer of power came with the 2024 election, which the opposition won convincingly, only for Maduro to brazenly steal it and proclaim victory without presenting any evidence. What followed was predictable: renewed repression, enabled by the complicity of allies and neighbors who never managed to unite around a viable solution. Still, Maduro was reportedly given many opportunities to negotiate a golden exile. He refused them all.

From that perspective, Trump’s extraction of the Venezuelan leader can be understood as a positive and even inevitable circuit breaker: an extraordinary act that disrupted the decaying status quo protecting the regime, forcing the country onto a different trajectory. When I visited Caracas in 2021, during a brief period of apparent entente between the regime and Washington, Chavismo seemed likely to cling to power for decades. That assessment no longer holds. This new experiment, with interim president Delcy Rodríguez taking orders from Washington, the CIA included, may still fail spectacularly. But it has opened a new era. And with political skill and strategic patience, Venezuela may finally move toward the democratic transition it has long been denied.

The political opening

The path I imagine hinges on Chavismo confronting its own fundamental contradiction: claiming to be anti-imperialist while acting as a U.S. government lapdog. Over time, internal cracks will likely widen, particularly within the military, the impenetrable force that has underpinned the regime and blocked the opposition. The political opening forced by Washington, combined with a degree of economic recovery, could realign incentives toward a new general election under the supervision of the U.S. and international organizations. In such a scenario, Chavismo would retain political representation, facing a reinvigorated opposition. If that happens, the forced removal of Maduro would not only be vindicated; it would have proved to be a progressive force for Venezuela and the region.

Before you press “send” on your hate mail, I am fully aware that much can go wrong, starting with a Trump administration that does not seem to have the discipline, or perhaps even the interest, to see this outcome through. Warnings on the risks of abandoning democratic efforts need to be heard; sooner rather than later, Venezuela will have to produce a framework for political transition, not least because constitutionally Rodríguez has only 180 days as interim president.

What to watch

The scorecard to watch in the coming months is the continued release of political prisoners, the return of opposition figures, the reconstitution of the National Electoral Council to include respected representatives and the establishment of a credible electoral roll. On the oil front, companies should be granted equal rights to invest, rather than privileging business figures linked to the regime, as recent hydrocarbon law changes appear to do.

Will all this happen? Time will tell, but everyone genuinely interested in a free Venezuela should press for it. True, the U.S. seizure of Maduro violated international law, but you can’t unring that bell. And there is no moral contradiction between welcoming Maduro’s capture and acknowledging its contravention of international rules.

Polls suggest that this is precisely how most Latin Americans see the situation, sharply at odds with perceptions in the U.S. For all the brainy academic debate and political calculations, a simple but powerful vox pop quote in a New York Times story summarizes the appropriate position on the event: “I am happy because I saw the fall of a dictator, and I am happy because my Venezuelan friends are happy.”

Temporary compromises

I am sure that no decent Venezuelan wanted to reach this point. I wish this conflict could have been resolved using one of the many Latin American institutional tools designed for such crises. That didn’t happen, not least because of the cynical fecklessness of regional powers. If the path to normalization requires temporary compromises like tolerating Rodríguez as interim president or María Corina Machado having to swallow her pride, so be it. Perfect options for Venezuela disappeared a long time ago.

JP Spinetto is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Latin American business, economic affairs and politics. He was previously Bloomberg News’ managing editor for economics and government in the region.

Related Articles

Catherine Thorbecke: Forget DeepSeek, dying alone is China’s latest tech obsession

Mary Ellen Klas: Republican governors are starting to understand the assignment

Sheldon Jacobson: Free speech needs a reset in America

Robert Pearl: Political and economic pressures set up a health care shift in 2026

Lisa Jarvis: The problem with that ‘Great Healthcare Plan’

Today is Sunday, Feb. 1, the 32nd day of 2026. There are 333 days left in the year.

Today in history:

On Feb. 1, 2003, the space shuttle Columbia broke apart as it re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere, killing all seven crew members: commander Rick Husband; pilot William McCool; payload commander Michael Anderson; mission specialists Kalpana Chawla, David Brown and Laurel Clark; and payload specialist Ilan Ramon.

Also on this date:

In 1865, abolitionist John S. Rock became the first Black lawyer admitted to the bar of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Related Articles

From Elon Musk to the former Prince Andrew, a who’s who of powerful men are named in Epstein files

Judge orders 5-year-old Liam Conejo Ramos and his dad released from ICE detention

Today in History: January 31, first Black quarterback plays and wins the Super Bowl

Macaulay Culkin, Meryl Streep and more pay tribute to Catherine O’Hara, who died at 71

The Westminster dog show is turning 150. Here’s what has — and hasn’t — changed over time

In 1943, during World War II, one of America’s most highly decorated military units, the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, made up almost exclusively of Japanese Americans, was activated.

In 1960, four Black college students began a sit-in protest at a Woolworth’s lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina, where they had been refused service.

In 1979, Iranian religious leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (hoh-MAY’-nee) was welcomed home by millions in Tehran as he ended nearly 15 years of exile.

In 1991, an arriving USAir jetliner crashed atop a commuter plane on a runway at Los Angeles International Airport, resulting in 35 deaths.

In 1994, Jeff Gillooly, Tonya Harding’s ex-husband, pleaded guilty in Portland, Oregon, to racketeering for his part in the attack on figure skater Nancy Kerrigan in exchange for a 24-month sentence and a $100,000 fine.

In 2002, Wall Street Journal journalist Daniel Pearl was killed by Islamist militants in Pakistan after being kidnapped nine days earlier.

In 2016, the World Health Organization declared a global emergency over the explosive spread of the Zika virus, which was linked to birth defects in the Americas.

In 2021, the army in Myanmar overthrew the elected government of the Southeast Asian country. (Armed resistance arose after the army used lethal force to crush nonviolent protests against its takeover, and an ensuing civil war left more than 3.6 million people displaced in the country, according to the U.N.)

Today’s birthdays:

Actor Garrett Morris is 89.
Political commentator Fred Barnes is 83.
Princess Stephanie of Monaco is 61.
Actor Sherilyn Fenn is 61.
U.S. Soccer Hall of Famer Michelle Akers is 60.
Comedian-actor Pauly Shore is 58.
Actor Michael C. Hall is 55.
Rapper Big Boi (Outkast) is 51.
Singer-songwriter Jason Isbell is 47.
TV personality Lauren Conrad is 40.
Mixed martial artist Ronda Rousey is 39.
Actor Julia Garner is 32.
Singer-actor Harry Styles is 32.
Singer Jessica Baio is 24.