urbanSTL

The conversation has been going on for years now. Mayor Slay came right out for reentry loud and clear in his 3rd inaugural. It came up in the 2010 County Exec race. The PD did a series in late 2010 on fragmentation issues. Rep. Clay endorsed reentry in the St Louis American in 2011. Sen. Chappelle-Nadal has entered a reentry amendment every year for 3 or 4 years now. Rep Gatschenberger entered two bills, one for reentry and one for full merger this year. Charles Schmitz of STL- World Class City is happy to go anywhere anytime to talk about it. Alderman French was on KTRS a year ago talking reentry. The conversation has been going on. Everyone is welcome to join in.

I also find ironic that people want from proponents every single detail right now, yet get upset about meetings and planning to figure out said details.

St. Louis American - Post floats city/county merger trial balloons

Anyone with good sources in city or county government has been playing dumb for some time about a series of very serious conversations between the offices of Mayor Francis G. Slay and County Executive Charlie A. Dooley. For years, an inner circle has explored how the city – which also is classified as a county within state government – might reenter the county as its 91st municipality (and, ultimately, how this expanded county might be merged into one major city).

http://www.stlamerican.com/news/politic ... mment-area

stlhistory wrote:http://stlouis-mo.gov/government/depart ... eID=341525

The St. Louis City "County Offices" budget includes the medical examiner, recorder of deeds, treasurer, and board of elections, which collectively employ 81 people.

The St. Louis City "Judicial Offices" budget includes the sheriff's department, court clerks, circuit attorney, and jail/juvenile detention workers, which employ 678 people.

In a city reentry, I would assume many of these people would lose their jobs, although some *might* be retained for a transition period or rehired by the county.

Serious question: is this a negative or a positive?

I know job loss is not a good thing, and I would feel for many of the people who lose their positions.

But this is one of the major things we're talking about when we talk about saving money by combining services. Should separate governments carrying out the same or similar tasks exist and spend millions of extra dollars just for the sake of employing a few hundred people?

You can probably tell which side I fall on, but I admit it's not a clear cut situation. I think cutting the budget would lead to gains that would create more jobs than we'd ultimately be slashing, but obviously any time you're slashing jobs it's worth thinking hard about.

It's hard to change things in St. Louis. People like what they know. They fear change. That would definitely be an issue in this case. That said...

If you live in Chesterfield, and fear your property value might go down or your taxes up under this plan, why do you support it?

Same question would apply to all the affluent munis in the County (Ladue, Frontenac, Kirkwood, Clayton, Webster, Sunset Hills, etc). How do you get them on board. Would their *mayors* ever sign on to this proposal?

Opposite question. You're a black politician in North County or North City. You think a plan like this weakens your political base. Or you're a resident of these areas, and you fear a loss of power/representation under this plan. Why would you support it?

Bottom line (putting this purely in Fox Newsy self-interest type terms): If you think there is any possible downside to this plan for you or your family personally - especially financially - why do you support it?

Well, the proponents of change have to do their best to inform them that most of their fears won't come to be and that the real downside is continuing the status quo.

You are asking people to put aside their personal self interest and motivations in favor of doing something for the greater good of their fellow man?

You really think people will do that? Especially here? In parochial, fractured-by-design, racist, suspicious, St. Louis?

You really think so?

There are lines of republicans in St. Louis County looking for any opportunity to smash Charlie Dooley and his fancy for regionalism.

There are black leaders in the city looking for similar opportunity to quash Mayor Slay and any of his ilk.

Where does the leadership come from to make this happen?

How about from ministers out on Clarkson Road preaching to their flocks that we need to do better by the poor black people in North County and the city of St. Louis?

I fear that won't work. I think that just about the only things we can agree on as a region are that we love the Cardinals; we hate the Cubs; we love all cops and firemen; we love our own alderman (sometimes); we love our school district (if it's in Parkway); we love our school (if it's private A-list); and, we love our immediate friends and neighbors.

But there's another list of things we all loathe...

We loathe the city earnings tax. We loathe the decline of North County. Many non-city residents loathe the city. We loathe, we loathe...we loathe.

But we will all get in a circle, sing kum ba ya, and vote for a giant municipal merger. Okay...

Maybe that's why Rexy is looking at doing an end-run. He knows as a region we're a hopeless case.

Here's an idea. Get all those forward looking St. Louisans to go outstate and promote the idea there via constitutional amendment. Do some reverse psychology. Get outstaters to start promoting the idea so much that locals have got to start doing something about it.

Which is exactly why there's talk about going over the heads of the people involved who won't do what's right.

Nobody disagrees with you that it's going to be hard because of too many people happy with their little factions and only thinking about themselves and today.

But it will be better for the region as a whole, and most people tomorrow (years really) if we do this. And if people won't come around on that, then I'm all for going to the state and trying to pass legislation and cutting the local voices out of it.

Sometimes people don't know what's good for themselves.

I agree, the big merger, City + COunty + 90 munis into one thing, won't pass. I support reentry.

Northside Neighbor wrote:You are asking people to put aside their personal self interest and motivations in favor of doing something for the greater good of their fellow man?

You really think people will do that? Especially here? In parochial, fractured-by-design, racist, suspicious, St. Louis?

You really think so?

There are lines of republicans in St. Louis County looking for any opportunity to smash Charlie Dooley and his fancy for regionalism.

There are black leaders in the city looking for similar opportunity to quash Mayor Slay and any of his ilk.

Where does the leadership come from to make this happen?

How about from ministers out on Clarkson Road preaching to their flocks that we need to do better by the poor black people in North County and the city of St. Louis?

I fear that won't work. I think that just about the only things we can agree on as a region are that we love the Cardinals; we hate the Cubs; we love all cops and firemen; we love our own alderman (sometimes); we love our school district (if it's in Parkway); we love our school (if it's private A-list); and, we love our immediate friends and neighbors.

But there's another list of things we all loathe...

We loathe the city earnings tax. We loathe the decline of North County. Many non-city residents loathe the city. We loathe, we loathe...we loathe.

But we will all get in a circle, sing kum ba ya, and vote for a giant municipal merger. Okay...

Maybe that's why Rexy is looking at doing an end-run. He knows as a region we're a hopeless case.

Here's an idea. Get all those forward looking St. Louisans to go outstate and promote the idea there via constitutional amendment. Do some reverse psychology. Get outstaters to start promoting the idea so much that locals have got to start doing something about it.

I am not trying to be snarky but basically you say that the problem is that St Louis is too married to its stereotypes and clichés, and you provide evidence for that by bringing up stereotypes and clichés.

Time has taught me that the world and out metro is more complex and more surprising. I could rattle off and list of things that I have seen happen in this town over 20 years that "smart money" people in the "know" and self proclaimed analysis experts told me would never happen.

I have also heard many a dire prediction that never came to pass.

So you are saying that stereotypes and cliches are not reflections of reality? Okay.

Out of the things I posted, which would you say is untrue?

Northside Neighbor wrote:So you are saying that stereotypes and cliches are not reflections of reality? Okay.

Out of the things I posted, which would you say is untrue?

Evidence can be found for everything you said but "evidence of" does not equate into overriding truth - zeitgeist is perceived, but history is written, and often shows a very different picture - don't confuse the loudest for the most, that makes for a self fulfilling prophesy.

edited for clearer thought

Fair enough, but in the world of politics and public opinion, perception is reality. Complicating matters, when that perception is colored by fear, watch out. And when you're in a region fearful of change, you better *really* watch out.

And when it comes to "fear of change" what's near the top of that list? Fear of blacks moving into the neighborhood.

Let's be more specific. Fear of (primarily low income, impoverished blacks- although they usually won't say that, often saying merely low income, impoverished *relatives* of ...) blacks moving into a neighborhood bringing crime, bringing down property value, bringing in a different culture, you name it.

St. Louis has a real hangup about race. And that is not perception. That is reality.

Okay, so even if you reject all of the above, let's get back to leadership.

Where is the unifying leadership to make this happen? Rex Sinquefield???

I used to be skeptical. I wrote this a couple of years ago.

http://urbanstl.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... 20#p185920

But I am more optimistic now than I have ever been. Even the online comments on STLToday to the Post Dispatch editorial seemed to be leaning toward re-entry, including a letter to the editor in today's edition.

This is more than a local issue. Why does the state have different rules for St. Louis than it does for other cities in the state? This could happen fast if it is addressed at the state level. It is in Missouri's interest for St. Louis to succeed. And the state has authority to define cities however it chooses.

This is one issue where we might need state intervention to save St. Louis. The argument could be made that many St. Louisans are not getting adequate and quality services, because of our fractured and inefficient government structure. I think Rex is going to lobby to circumnavigate local interests and for a state ballot measure. He will likely use paraphrases like "get rid of big government/brother", "right to work", and "cut my taxes" to push this agenda. I could really see this being sold to outstate as St. Louis being a prime example of big government and "liberal policies" causing high crime, the "welfare state", a large tax burden, slow growth etc.

I think some monied and powerful interest want to go nuclear (unigov) also, Reentry just doesn't go far enough if your trying to change perceptions, lower taxes, have more political clout and pull.

A statewide ballot would be for a constitutional amendment like HJR 39 (merger) and 40 (reentry). One reason to do it that way is that it gets rid of the Board of Freeholders process. While it looks like it offers us great flexibility in reality it's a flawed process. I say that because it has only gotten two things done, the separation in 1876 and MSD.

What if we say to petition signers tha the BoF will just go for reentry and then they come up with a plan for full merger or something else? The process has been done so few times I think it'll be an easy target for litigation, which could be used as a strategy by opponents.

Imagine if we do reentry under the BoF then after a muni or unincorporated area wants to be annexed into the city of St. Louis, well we;'d have to go through the BoF again.

^ Bingo!

For reentry I would have the depts of the county form transition plans within a certain amount of time and then the county council with two additional members, appointed by the Mayor and approved by the BoA, would approve them with target dates of execution. Meanwhile the BoA works on charter and ordinance changes in order to be a city within the county also to be completed within a certain amount of time.

Reentry would also allow St. Louis city to utilize annexation, which would be a voluntary and organic way for the city to grow land area and population. I'think there are at least a few small municipalities or portions of unincorporated St. Louis County adjacent to the city limits that would vote to be annexed.

-RBB

stlhistory wrote:^To the above point, wouldn't STL city have to have a popular vote on whether to annex neighboring areas?

I'm not there there is an answer to that; it hasn't been a possibility for 150 years, so I doubt there's anything on the city's books.

My completely uneducated guess is new City annexation legislation would need to be drafted unless there's some overriding state law that would set standards of some sort.

-RBB