I didn't mean to alarm the masses. Long ago there was discussion on this board about breaking the city into a bunch of St. Louis county sized towns -- wondering it that could lead to some kind of burrough system along with equal sized towns in the county for a larger St. Louis City. It was just for discussion -- don't start making plans to move to Canada yet. These could just be steps toward a larger goal of metro-wide planning and execution for metro-wide issues.
- 2,929
^Gary: I thought that's what you meant, nothing nefarious or "going to Canada"-worthy. And while I don't really think it would be that effective, I'll credit you with thinking for new ideas. Even if, upon first glance, it didn't look pretty.
^^Quincunx: Have you or your group reached out to Bert Walker? Because I think he is exactly the type of person your group should be seeking. He's accomplished, respected in and out of the community, beyond politically connected, and has plenty of money to throw around at causes he believes in. And, good luck with all of this going forward.
^^Quincunx: Have you or your group reached out to Bert Walker? Because I think he is exactly the type of person your group should be seeking. He's accomplished, respected in and out of the community, beyond politically connected, and has plenty of money to throw around at causes he believes in. And, good luck with all of this going forward.
- 11K
^ Perhaps the egg needs to be broken further before a solution can be found...
Anyway, can you imagine this headline: "Jeff-Vander-Lou named most dangerous city in America." Huh????? (I know, I know, it wouldn't happen.)
Anyway, can you imagine this headline: "Jeff-Vander-Lou named most dangerous city in America." Huh????? (I know, I know, it wouldn't happen.)
^LOL, well I think our friends a CQ Press place a min population when ranking cities. After all when some small town has a mass murder and its murder rate for that year is orders of magnitude higher than St Louis' they don't show up.
- 3,429
Like Disney World. The have a 1000 crimes on the property every year, but only a couple of people actually live on the property. So 1000 / 2 = Most Dangerous City in America = Disney World.quincunx wrote:^LOL, well I think our friends a CQ Press place a min population when ranking cities. After all when some small town has a mass murder and its murder rate for that year is orders of magnitude higher than St Louis' they don't show up.
In fact, people from Orlando were angry about being ranked high up in the US News crime ranking. They said it was unfair, because US News uses the local population as the denominator, while crime in the numerator is from the local population PLUS the millions of visitors each year. So that is another way that the ranking is invalid.
- 11K
^ That's the same distortion offered by the seemingly more accurate "Most Dangerous Neighborhood" rankings. At least at a glance it appeared that central city neighborhoods that included, or were near entertainment districts were most dangerous...lots of visitors, some crime and few residents.
What the hell is this? Way too premature. Did she even call Charlie Dooley?
State senator proposes bill to allow St. Louis to re-enter St. Louis County
http://www.stlbeacon.org/voices/blogs/p ... uis-county
Why work on this if friendly fire like this threatens to screw it up? Where's the discipline?
Here's two amendments she's submitted SJR 6 and SJR 19
http://www.senate.mo.gov/11info/BTS_Web ... ID=4065266
http://www.senate.mo.gov/11info/BTS_Web ... ID=4173302
State senator proposes bill to allow St. Louis to re-enter St. Louis County
http://www.stlbeacon.org/voices/blogs/p ... uis-county
Why work on this if friendly fire like this threatens to screw it up? Where's the discipline?
Here's two amendments she's submitted SJR 6 and SJR 19
http://www.senate.mo.gov/11info/BTS_Web ... ID=4065266
http://www.senate.mo.gov/11info/BTS_Web ... ID=4173302
- 597
^There's a chance the state will vote on this?Chappelle-Nadal (right) announced today she has filed Senate Joint Resolution 19, which would ask Missouri voters "if the city should become a part of the county and exist in the same manner as any other city in the county."
Yes, you can accomplish reentry via a constitutional amendment which would be a state-wide vote - sidestepping the language in Article VI Section 30(a) and (b).
We're not the only ones taken aback by this.
Bill to unite city, county surprises officials from both sides
Bill to unite city, county surprises officials from both sides
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... a77e1.html"The senator did not talk to me about this at all," Slay said.
I realize this is not the end all and be all, but the discussion today on the Charlie Brennan Show was a disaster. Thanks Senator!
- 597
isn't the discussion on the Charlie Brennan always a disaster? He panders to paranoia. Honestly, I think I trust Kansas City to be more logical than St Louis County paranoids. Hopefully Rex can throw some money behind this if it indeed goes statewide.
Dr. Charles Schmitz co-chair of StL World Class City and of UMSL fame, along with Ambassador Bert Walker, spoke at the MAC Downtown Rotary Club Luncheon today.
Here's his speech. What do you think?
Here's his speech. What do you think?
I liked it. I hope they are successful. I support them. We need to people like him to help all in the county, city, other counties realize that this problem is a regional issue not just a city problem. We can't have a global or national presence without these problems being tackled.
I especially liked when he mentioned that they wouldn't force all of these cities in the county to combine organizations (police, government, etc.) but that they can if they want to. (And I think they will once they see the benefits). He's being reasonable and open-minded to how established cities in the county might react.
I especially liked when he mentioned that they wouldn't force all of these cities in the county to combine organizations (police, government, etc.) but that they can if they want to. (And I think they will once they see the benefits). He's being reasonable and open-minded to how established cities in the county might react.
They Divided, No One Conquered. Did We All Lose?
Tonight 7pm at Ethical Society of St. Louis
http://womensvoicesraised.org/programs.shtml
Tonight 7pm at Ethical Society of St. Louis
http://womensvoicesraised.org/programs.shtml
The event last night was great. Terry Jones gave a brief history of the topic. Kathleen Brown of St Louis is a World Class City gave a presentation on reentry. Then the panel assembled with the addition of Mike Jones, Jeff Rainford, and Sen Maria Chapelle-Nadal.
They all really get it. Rainford said the City will merge anything at anytime whenever the County feels like it's ready to date.
Mike Jones made very good points as to how our fragmented governments around our cities will not work in the 21st century.
The Senator worked on the plan in the late 80s that would have resulted in 37 munis in the County which she supports today. The last few years she's submitted resolutions to rewrite the Freeholders language in an attempt to get the conversation started.
Until of course she put in a resolution for the amendment for reentry a couple weeks ago. I just wish she had called someone. She sees this as a consumer issue. The US economy was driven by consumer spending leveraged by taking money out of their homes for the last 25 years, well that's over. In order to spur consumer spending we have to take less for government services by consolidating them.
They all really get it. Rainford said the City will merge anything at anytime whenever the County feels like it's ready to date.
Mike Jones made very good points as to how our fragmented governments around our cities will not work in the 21st century.
The Senator worked on the plan in the late 80s that would have resulted in 37 munis in the County which she supports today. The last few years she's submitted resolutions to rewrite the Freeholders language in an attempt to get the conversation started.
Until of course she put in a resolution for the amendment for reentry a couple weeks ago. I just wish she had called someone. She sees this as a consumer issue. The US economy was driven by consumer spending leveraged by taking money out of their homes for the last 25 years, well that's over. In order to spur consumer spending we have to take less for government services by consolidating them.
St Louis Beacon article on the Forum Thursday night.
We can work it out: Forum explores city-county reorganization
http://www.stlbeacon.org/region/108864- ... ganization
Here's an article from 2009 by David Stokes at Show-Me Institute on how the County might benefit from reentry:
http://showmeinstitute.org/publications ... eturn.html
We can work it out: Forum explores city-county reorganization
http://www.stlbeacon.org/region/108864- ... ganization
Here's an article from 2009 by David Stokes at Show-Me Institute on how the County might benefit from reentry:
http://showmeinstitute.org/publications ... eturn.html
- 3,429
The challenge will be to convince a majority of County residents that they will benefit from the merger. Just saying their taxes should do down won't do it. It needs to be quantified and ideally the tax reduction, or at least no tax increase, can be incorporated into the re-entry proposal put to voters.
I'd like to see your thoughts on the three main fears of re-entry for County residents as a response to my post here:
http://nextstl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=185920#p185920
I'd like to see your thoughts on the three main fears of re-entry for County residents as a response to my post here:
http://nextstl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=185920#p185920
Definitely a challenge but doable, think Prop A. Also, both the city and county now share a common thread of a shrinking population. Regionalism might be a goal but it will really take movement between the county and city with its million plus population to start things.gary kreie wrote:The challenge will be to convince a majority of County residents that they will benefit from the merger. Just saying their taxes should do down won't do it. It needs to be quantified and ideally the tax reduction, or at least no tax increase, can be incorporated into the re-entry proposal put to voters.
I'd like to see your thoughts on the three main fears of re-entry for County residents as a response to my post here:
http://nextstl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=185920#p185920
Like Prop A, start lining up the players who can articulate an argument from the political side (thinking former west county mayor who now heads Metro) from the strong institutions (time for UMSL to step up as Wash U has had recently) and business community.
Second, make it a two prong argument that you are actually consolidating county services in Clayton while arguing that its time for a bit of muni consolidation in the county itself. Their is definitie support in the county to drop the number of speed traps, I mean muni's.
Third, time for the city to admit that they don't need 28 alderman. A major reform within the city government will make a big difference on perception
Fourth, make a business case as soon as the first China air cargo plane lands if not sooner. City owns the airport and developments such as North Park surround it. Both Downtown and Clayton CBD will benefit in the long term for office space.
- 3,429
That is not nearly enough to overcome the typical St. Louis Countian's fear of the unknown. If we could convince everyone with an intellectual argument alone, it would have happened a long time ago. County people and politicians will put up an extensive list of how this could hurt Countians in the 3 areas I mentioned in my post at the link above -- Property Values, Taxes, and Loss of Services.
We better have specific plans and dollar savings from consolidation of specific agencies, as well as detailed enhancement projects and results that can come from the re-entry. Breezy trust-us style discussions, however well presented and accurate, will never overcome the built-in bias honed over the last several decades against merger. Countians will start with the assumption that City decay is spreading to the County, and merger will only hasten that trend. If we can't show that there is something significant here for individuals County residents, as well as the City, we are just wasting our time and any merge will be easily defeated in the County.
I was hoping to hear some specific "oh, yeah -- I want that" benefits/cash from a City re-entry into the county, that will actually make a Countian vote for it purely for his own selfish reasons.
We better have specific plans and dollar savings from consolidation of specific agencies, as well as detailed enhancement projects and results that can come from the re-entry. Breezy trust-us style discussions, however well presented and accurate, will never overcome the built-in bias honed over the last several decades against merger. Countians will start with the assumption that City decay is spreading to the County, and merger will only hasten that trend. If we can't show that there is something significant here for individuals County residents, as well as the City, we are just wasting our time and any merge will be easily defeated in the County.
I was hoping to hear some specific "oh, yeah -- I want that" benefits/cash from a City re-entry into the county, that will actually make a Countian vote for it purely for his own selfish reasons.
At the moment I don't have any numbers for you. The Show-Me institute has commissioned a study which we hope will have some that'll be useful for this effort.
Qualitative arguments on the issues you raise:
Property values: it'll help as there will no longer be this extra little county with really bad stats to drag everyone down.
Taxes: Since everyone thinks that the City performs services dramatically less efficiently than anyone else, if the departments of the County scale up ~35% at a constant or falling $/citizen then we all save tax money. Will that lead to lower tax rates? I submit that the County property tax levy will fall. Also without the burden of providing county-type services the City is more likely to get rid of the earnings tax. The place more likely to see higher taxes is the City.
Loss of control: Individual fire, police, park, etc will be unmolested. Sewer and some road infrastructure are already shared via MSD and EWGCG. St Louis metro produces ~40% of the transportation revenue for the state and gets back ~24% of it. By mitigating fragmentation the more likely our state legislators will work together in Jeff City for the region as a whole. Divide and conquer tactics by out-staters are less likely to work.
Note that Prop A failed in the City 2-1 yet still passed.
Qualitative arguments on the issues you raise:
Property values: it'll help as there will no longer be this extra little county with really bad stats to drag everyone down.
Taxes: Since everyone thinks that the City performs services dramatically less efficiently than anyone else, if the departments of the County scale up ~35% at a constant or falling $/citizen then we all save tax money. Will that lead to lower tax rates? I submit that the County property tax levy will fall. Also without the burden of providing county-type services the City is more likely to get rid of the earnings tax. The place more likely to see higher taxes is the City.
Loss of control: Individual fire, police, park, etc will be unmolested. Sewer and some road infrastructure are already shared via MSD and EWGCG. St Louis metro produces ~40% of the transportation revenue for the state and gets back ~24% of it. By mitigating fragmentation the more likely our state legislators will work together in Jeff City for the region as a whole. Divide and conquer tactics by out-staters are less likely to work.
Note that Prop A failed in the City 2-1 yet still passed.
I agree those issues need to be addressed. However, I would trump fears of those items with more important, not so sunny realities: As a region, we're economically stagnant and it costs us a ton of tax money in political overhead to stay stagnant. All of us are in for an unfortunate economical sh*t storm if we don't learn how to get along and run the region more efficiently.gary kreie wrote:The challenge will be to convince a majority of County residents that they will benefit from the merger. Just saying their taxes should do down won't do it. It needs to be quantified and ideally the tax reduction, or at least no tax increase, can be incorporated into the re-entry proposal put to voters.
I'd like to see your thoughts on the three main fears of re-entry for County residents as a response to my post here:
http://nextstl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=185920#p185920
Prevailing Hypothesis: Embracing regionalism would benefit all interested parties (read: all citizens of the metro area). Numerically, I don't see how taxes could possibly go up for anyone as a result of the merger. If anything, they should go down, ostensibly speaking. In other words, if we were to reduce the "overhead" involved in running the region, align services, and re-focus TIF and other incentives to benefit the entire metro economic landscape, we should reduce our overall (taxes) costs.
Quantitative Measurement: I would utilize a number of "efficiency factors".
Examples:
1 - Salaries of metro elected leaders compared to tax revenue growth in the last ten years. Story: How much does it cost us for economic growth/non-growth? Could we spend less and get the same(or better) results?
2 - Total cost of government (all Stl city/county) / population for city/county. Story: compared to other regions (who are fairing better than us) what is their total cost of operation? If they're spending less money and getting better service, why can't we do the same?
Bottomline: I would deflect people's fears and frame the question from a standpoint anyone can relate to (especially fiscally conservative county people) - what are you paying for (in taxes), how can you spend less and get the same thing (probably more), and how do we bolster the longevity of the region in doing so.
Crux: This has to be, as one person in the Beacon article stated, a grassroots movement. This change has to begin with the people. The power structure has it in their best interest to NOT CHANGE. Rainford attending the event is fluff politics. Did anyone bother to ask him about his level of audacity? How could he attend the event and put the onus on the county when the city has an aldermanic (overhead) structure that is completely archaic and fiscally degrading? The only thing that makes this initiative "far from clear" is what to do with all of the unneeded political leaders/municipal government employees if we all merge. Think about it: dogs won't fall from the sky, Russia won't attack St. Louis, and SERVICES WILL NOT STOP. The only sticking point is the legislature passing legislation that still has their interests in mind - they're still feeling that out, which is probably why you have a Senator trying to enact legislation and not local leaders. This idea, this initiative fundamentally does not fit the mold of cronyistic, protectionist, small-minded politics that has our region in a Chuck Norris-like submission hold.
Complete Unicorn make believe - how do we enact legislation that forces the local governments to merge or address merging every five years, a' la the city earnings tax law?
The people need to unite and tackle this idea head on.
Fact and Food for thought: Florissant, the largest municipality by population, has a 2011 balanced budget of $23.4M. HALF of the expenditures in that budget are for the police department, which has its own power structure reporting up through the mayor. The remaining half of the budget is managed by the Mayor et al.
Do we need an entire City's worth of people and pensions overseeing a $10M budget?
Now multiply that by half of the municipalities in the county.
Do we need an entire City's worth of people and pensions overseeing a $10M budget?
Now multiply that by half of the municipalities in the county.
A bit ancillary to the thread topic but pertinent nonetheless. There is a bill currently in the Missouri House to reverse the 1993 ruling that dictates how A and B cities in St. Louis County share tax revenue.
Here is the Fox 2 news clip of the Mayor of Fenton complaining about the current tax structure: http://www.fox2now.com/ktvi-st-louis-co ... 7471.story
Here is a copy of the bill discussed in the news clip: http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... B0534I.htm
Crux: This bill would reverse the ruling that mandates St. Louis County Municipalities from pooling money within the entire county. Currently, there are A cities (point of sale cities) and B cities (pool cities). The majority of St. Louis Municipalites, including Fenton, are B cities and current law dictates that any new municipality has to become a B (pool) city (this would include St. Louis City if it became a municipality, in theory). The real kicker: there is verbiage in the bill that gives municipalities the option to change their A/B designation within a set amount of time once the bill passes.
In other words, Fenton which is only complaining because it is generating so much revenue off of the Gravios Bluffs development, would have the option to move to an A (point of sale) city after the legislation passes.
Why it Matters: This bill only further purports fragmentation. It will absolutely separate "have" municipalities from "have not" municipalities. Furthermore, tax revenue disbursement would no longer be based upon population, for A cities it would be based upon tax revenue generated in the municipality. I can't believe the mayor of a municipality that just lost what is easily considered its LARGEST job base EVER (Fenton Chrylser) would be so narrow minded and protectionist.
Tie-in to the thread: This passing of this bill would almost assuredly kill any notion of merging the City and the County. Which, now that I've spoken with the assistant Treasurer of the County, I now realize is a process that has to begin on the County side of the issue.
Here is the Fox 2 news clip of the Mayor of Fenton complaining about the current tax structure: http://www.fox2now.com/ktvi-st-louis-co ... 7471.story
Here is a copy of the bill discussed in the news clip: http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bi ... B0534I.htm
Crux: This bill would reverse the ruling that mandates St. Louis County Municipalities from pooling money within the entire county. Currently, there are A cities (point of sale cities) and B cities (pool cities). The majority of St. Louis Municipalites, including Fenton, are B cities and current law dictates that any new municipality has to become a B (pool) city (this would include St. Louis City if it became a municipality, in theory). The real kicker: there is verbiage in the bill that gives municipalities the option to change their A/B designation within a set amount of time once the bill passes.
In other words, Fenton which is only complaining because it is generating so much revenue off of the Gravios Bluffs development, would have the option to move to an A (point of sale) city after the legislation passes.
Why it Matters: This bill only further purports fragmentation. It will absolutely separate "have" municipalities from "have not" municipalities. Furthermore, tax revenue disbursement would no longer be based upon population, for A cities it would be based upon tax revenue generated in the municipality. I can't believe the mayor of a municipality that just lost what is easily considered its LARGEST job base EVER (Fenton Chrylser) would be so narrow minded and protectionist.
Tie-in to the thread: This passing of this bill would almost assuredly kill any notion of merging the City and the County. Which, now that I've spoken with the assistant Treasurer of the County, I now realize is a process that has to begin on the County side of the issue.
- 11K
^ Here's the nextSTL.com article on the issue: http://nextstl.com/st-louis-county/st-l ... omic-unity