I'd take anything at this point, even if it were just St. Louis city merging back into St. Louis County with zero other changes.
With the caveat that I'm not expecting much to happen, something I do worry about with the city re-entering the county is various city offices moving to Clayton. I don't want that to happen, also just from a budget perspective the prudent thing to do would be to move merged offices Downtown and sell or rent the County office space in Clayton, it's worth a lot more...
- 2,052
^ or even one less, as a starter just consolidate reporting to soften some of our rougher stats and boost some of our jobs/performance stats. Easy marketing win.
- 337
Yes 100% stats should be metro based so we no longer hit the headlines as being dangerous that would be a good start imo. That is if we really only want to take baby steps.pattimagee wrote:^ or even one less, as a starter just consolidate reporting to soften some of our rougher stats and boost some of our jobs/performance stats. Easy marketing win.
- 2,419
The stats aren't going to change until the borders of St. Louis city are gone; merging the city into the county as a 89th municipality -- or whatever it is -- won't do it.
I'd support St. Louis city and St. Louis County simply becoming "St. Louis" or "The Unified Government of St. Louis," or whatever the heck they'd like to call it.
I just don't know if/when that's going to happen. I say merge the city into the county, make it a county of 1.3 million residents, and then go from there.
I'd support St. Louis city and St. Louis County simply becoming "St. Louis" or "The Unified Government of St. Louis," or whatever the heck they'd like to call it.
I just don't know if/when that's going to happen. I say merge the city into the county, make it a county of 1.3 million residents, and then go from there.
That is way too logical and therefore has zero chance of happening.RockChalkSTL wrote: ↑Nov 28, 2022The stats aren't going to change until the borders of St. Louis city are gone; merging the city into the county as a 89th municipality -- or whatever it is -- won't do it.
I'd support St. Louis city and St. Louis County simply becoming "St. Louis" or "The Unified Government of St. Louis," or whatever the heck they'd like to call it.
I just don't know if/when that's going to happen. I say merge the city into the county, make it a county of 1.3 million residents, and then go from there.
If the city were to rejoin the county, would the city be able to annex any areas? I assume legally yes, but I mean more whether they'll be politically able to grow if there are any municipalities that would have interest in joining the city and if the city would be looking to add them in? I have no idea what the leanings of most of the city-adjacent areas would be in regards to this. While I'd love to see a consolidated city-county, I think the city growing a little at a time might be more probable in the short term if they ever do rejoin.
^ Yes. Much like county municipalities explore annexing unincorporated areas or merging with adjacent municipalities, a re-entered city would be able to do the same.
Like any other annexation, it would require a vote of both jurisdictions and frankly, I don’t know of any county municipalities that would have any interest in merging into the city limits. Maybe Wellston, though I’m not sure that would exactly be a net-positive for the city…
As far as crime stats, the smart move would be to re-enter the city and then consolidate the two large city and county police departments. Let the municipalities keep their police departments for now. I think a merged MPD and CPD would be a significant step forward in actually addressing crime (plus pay disparities between the two departments, recruitment issues in the city, etc.) and would allow us to report crime statistics that would account for the city and the unincorporated/contract areas that the county police currently cover. It wouldn’t be “metro-wide” stats but it would likely be more than enough to drop us well enough away from the top of the list.
Like any other annexation, it would require a vote of both jurisdictions and frankly, I don’t know of any county municipalities that would have any interest in merging into the city limits. Maybe Wellston, though I’m not sure that would exactly be a net-positive for the city…
As far as crime stats, the smart move would be to re-enter the city and then consolidate the two large city and county police departments. Let the municipalities keep their police departments for now. I think a merged MPD and CPD would be a significant step forward in actually addressing crime (plus pay disparities between the two departments, recruitment issues in the city, etc.) and would allow us to report crime statistics that would account for the city and the unincorporated/contract areas that the county police currently cover. It wouldn’t be “metro-wide” stats but it would likely be more than enough to drop us well enough away from the top of the list.
- 1,607
Why not? Consolidated county services would be HUGE and should be a no brainer. The sheriff has to move his office? Wooopdee doo. And you don't know the county wouldn't keep a large satellite administrative office in the city. This is the type of thinking that prevents merger progress - the "I must hold onto every office and functionality" mentality. We need to remove this mindset as the merging of counties would be widely beneficial through streamlining and redundancy removal.PeterXCV wrote: ↑Nov 28, 2022With the caveat that I'm not expecting much to happen, something I do worry about with the city re-entering the county is various city offices moving to Clayton. I don't want that to happen, also just from a budget perspective the prudent thing to do would be to move merged offices Downtown and sell or rent the County office space in Clayton, it's worth a lot more...
^ Agree 100%. Sacrifices will have to made on both ends and each side refusing to compromise only holds us back.
Plus, there is some precedent for this. The official county seat in Jackson County, Missouri is Independence and not KC. However, there are county offices, courthouses, etc. in downtown KCMO. Both essentially operate as co-seats.
Plus, there is some precedent for this. The official county seat in Jackson County, Missouri is Independence and not KC. However, there are county offices, courthouses, etc. in downtown KCMO. Both essentially operate as co-seats.
- 2,419
I think the city would have the ability to annex, though I doubt many of the county municipalities would be up for it, even places like Wellston and Jennings.
I don't see what sacrifice the County makes in this situation. I think more vacant office buildings Downtown is bad for the region as a whole.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Nov 28, 2022^ Agree 100%. Sacrifices will have to made on both ends and each side refusing to compromise only holds us back.
Plus, there is some precedent for this. The official county seat in Jackson County, Missouri is Independence and not KC. However, there are county offices, courthouses, etc. in downtown KCMO. Both essentially operate as co-seats.
- 1,792
What should they sacrifice. The county doesn't owe the city any more than the city owes the county. They could continue to exist separately and would i guess at some level for a long time to come. Merger is about what can be done together. Either you believe in it, or you are ok with the region eating itself as long as the city comes out on top.PeterXCV wrote: ↑Nov 28, 2022I don't see what sacrifice the County makes in this situation. I think more vacant office buildings Downtown is bad for the region as a whole.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Nov 28, 2022^ Agree 100%. Sacrifices will have to made on both ends and each side refusing to compromise only holds us back.
Plus, there is some precedent for this. The official county seat in Jackson County, Missouri is Independence and not KC. However, there are county offices, courthouses, etc. in downtown KCMO. Both essentially operate as co-seats.
I'm not even sure I think the county government should be downtown. It's certainly not central to the region. The city has just as much access to it as people in far flung chesterfield. It's still accessible by Metrolink. How many jobs are we even talking about here that can even be moved.
DO we really think that after reentry the county will just take the jobs from downtown and put them all in downtown clayton and screw the 300k voters of the city. The city will control ~ 1/4 of the county council after re-entry. Also, every future win in the city will be a win for the county as well so they will be investing in that success instead of against it. This is often the case now but only because the case has been made so clearly that the region and the city rise and fall together. If a different political dynamic arises in the future and the symbiotic relationship hasn't been codified the city and county could be back to a more adversarial approach to administration.
Example: Clayton is penned in geographically by some very wealthy and influential neighborhoods. It's can't grow ad infinitum. They are also not the only muni that county government has to satisfy. The council has to invest in the entire electorate so they can get a majority of the support for re-election. There will always be administrative function performed throughout the county. NW Plaza has several county functions that it administers in St. Ann. My primary thought is most county functions should be accessible to Metrolink if at all possible. Setting that criteria alone would heavily favor the city for future county offices, and it makes a lot of sense as well. Of course, that's the sort of thing 1/4 of the county voting as a block could influence significantly but only if they are part of the discussion. Munis like Brentwood Maplewood Clayton, Shrewsbury, Bellerive, and St. Ann could all get behind a principal like that to for a pretty intimidating coalition. But who would benefit the most. The city of course.
Take the long view. Cities like Chesterfield will resist because they know how much influence they risk losing if the city reenters into the county. The idea the city would self-own over its current county function jobs which likely would be phased out and wouldn't even necessarily go away completely anyway is a little maddening.
I will say that the downtown offices have better architecture than Clayton, it'd be a shame if downtown city hall weren't the nominal seat of government from a purely aesthetic perspective
- 1,607
Good grief.
City hall will still be well populated as...City hall!
The county functions would likely be consolidated to Clayton but very likely have some sort of satellite presence in their current locations. And now I see why we can't move this forward. We cling to the trappings of our fiefdom like Kinloch, Edmundson or any other county municipality of 800 residents. Think bigger, and longer term people. You want to see more offices filled? By getting reinserted into the county and moving forward in a cohesive, regional thinking, non competitive manner, that's a great start. I'll give up a four score of county level bureaucrats for the long term regionalism and subsequent growth.
City hall will still be well populated as...City hall!
The county functions would likely be consolidated to Clayton but very likely have some sort of satellite presence in their current locations. And now I see why we can't move this forward. We cling to the trappings of our fiefdom like Kinloch, Edmundson or any other county municipality of 800 residents. Think bigger, and longer term people. You want to see more offices filled? By getting reinserted into the county and moving forward in a cohesive, regional thinking, non competitive manner, that's a great start. I'll give up a four score of county level bureaucrats for the long term regionalism and subsequent growth.
- 1,868
The only concern I have is, does that lose us the opportunity for a more comprehensive merger (i.e. the sort of merger that favorably manipulates crime statistics)? Aside from that (which might be a pipe dream regardless), basic re-entry seems like a no-brainer. At least we get a unified political body that has some interest in regional success out of the deal.RockChalkSTL wrote: ↑Nov 28, 2022I'd take anything at this point, even if it were just St. Louis city merging back into St. Louis County with zero other changes.
^ That’s not what this is. That failed miserably and in scandal. They’re not going to attempt that again.
- 2,419
I wouldn't be opposed to a similar effort -- in fact, it's what I'd prefer -- but I see it as unlikely, at least for now, and so I just want us to start the process.
Put the city in the county and merge policing and other services.
Put the city in the county and merge policing and other services.
- 2,928
Merged redundant services alone will save a ton of money, i.e., a unified Parks Department and Facilities Management, as well as Emergency Services like the Police. That's the biggest takeaway from Better Together (as well as that Steve Stenger is a criminal and a prick). Some of this will be based in the County, maybe Clayton; some of this will be based in the City, maybe near Forest Park. It must be give-and-take, and sharing.
The first objective must be the City and the County being part of the same entity. After that, we can consider things like municipality consolidation and/or the City's expansion into the County. None of this comes without some form of merger ahead of time.
How do we best further the City rejoining the County? Who do we call and lobby?
Issues we'll still need to figure out:
1. County Council representation, i.e., the City will likely get 2 seats on the Council, and the County GOP knows they will be DEM seats ad infinitum.
2. What will the City do with the Earnings Tax? Would it continue, or even need to after cost savings from redundant services merging? Would other municipalities want to merge with the City (such as Wellston mentioned above) if they have to pay into the Earnings Tax?
3. Lambert Airport. This is owned by the City; could sharing ownership in this asset be enough to compel County antagonists to support the City joining the County again?
4. Schools and Crime. These issues will permeate any conversation.
The first objective must be the City and the County being part of the same entity. After that, we can consider things like municipality consolidation and/or the City's expansion into the County. None of this comes without some form of merger ahead of time.
How do we best further the City rejoining the County? Who do we call and lobby?
Issues we'll still need to figure out:
1. County Council representation, i.e., the City will likely get 2 seats on the Council, and the County GOP knows they will be DEM seats ad infinitum.
2. What will the City do with the Earnings Tax? Would it continue, or even need to after cost savings from redundant services merging? Would other municipalities want to merge with the City (such as Wellston mentioned above) if they have to pay into the Earnings Tax?
3. Lambert Airport. This is owned by the City; could sharing ownership in this asset be enough to compel County antagonists to support the City joining the County again?
4. Schools and Crime. These issues will permeate any conversation.
2. No way the savings from reentry makes up for the earnings tax. If the police depts merge, then the city might not need the earnings tax rev anymore, but then how does the new merged police dept get paid for? Regardless I'd much rather have the area taxed by the earnings tax increased and sales and property taxes decreased over the opposite, but that's unpopular I know.
3. Right now the county gets a great deal, it gets a bunch of sales taxes from the airport.
4. Municipal merger doesn't affect schools, though I realize that'll be hard to explain compared to the FUD that would be put out there. Crime, idk, very difficult to convince many that the "city's crime" will come to their area. I wish more could think of the region's crime as the region's crime instead of pretending the boarders matter so much.
3. Right now the county gets a great deal, it gets a bunch of sales taxes from the airport.
4. Municipal merger doesn't affect schools, though I realize that'll be hard to explain compared to the FUD that would be put out there. Crime, idk, very difficult to convince many that the "city's crime" will come to their area. I wish more could think of the region's crime as the region's crime instead of pretending the boarders matter so much.
- 1,607
KMOV did a story on this last night that came across as decidedly negative/ against. Longest interview was with....Ehlman of St. Charles!
https://www.kmov.com/2022/11/30/city-co ... -together/
https://www.kmov.com/2022/11/30/city-co ... -together/
- 2,419
The worst thing about St. Louis as a non-native may honestly be the local media, the junk stories they produce, and the sheer number of junk-slurping fools you can find.
- 740
Of course local media would treat St. Charles politicians like Ehlmann as somehow above the fray and purely good government types. Could you imagine how KMOV would howl if Kim Gardner were arrested for DUI and tried to wave a badge to get out of it the way SCC Prosecuting Attorney Tim Lohmar did at Lake of the Ozarks this summer?