urbanSTL

Novel and fun that Slay keeps pushing to talk about mergers, but you have to take it slow and I for one am not convinced that a full city / county bohemouth would be a good idea. Should the city be part of the county maybe. Should the county combine some of its many and varried towns: absoultly. Does someone want to explain to me the differences between say Ladue, Frontenac, and Huntleigh? or Say Ballwin and Ellisville or Mancheste or Winchesterr? What about Des Peres, Town and COuntry, and Creve Couer? In the end there are too many almost identical towns and they should be combined into larger groups. The city would feel infantly more comfortable joining the county if there were say... 20 other municipalities rather than 96 knowing that interests of the citys 300,000 residents wouldn't be over run by say the swing vote of Winchester.

Ultiamtly, what the region needs is not one fully combined city/ county. The loss of represnetation at a local level would make it hard to ever see this happen. What the city needs it to become part of a county, full of more centeralized municpalites. Then an over lay of larger regional body, incorprating say parts of Illinois, St. Charles, and Jefferson county could over see say the airport, the RCGA, East West Gateway, and Metro. Start there and see if further powers should be deligated down to the local level or powers that need to be more centeralized.

JMedwick,



I think you're onto something with the idea of merging together municipalities in the county. 92 or whatever the number is now, is awfully high. It just doesn't make sense. I think it would make sense for St. Louis City to work with/absorb smaller municipalities closer to the city, places that border the city. Like Maplewood, U. City, Shrewsbury (really, is Shrewsbury that different from parts of SW City...just less dense). Or imagine the economic impact that would be caused by merging the city with Clayton. I know some of these places residents would never support it, but one can dream.



I just think it makes sense for the city to increase it's size. We aren't blessed with unlimited land the way some cities out west are, so we have to work with what we have. And since there are fewer and fewer neighborhoods that can be built up, moving out makes a little more sense.



I think we can return to a time where our city has a population of 500,000, but I think we should push our limits beyond that. How can we do that?

Champ consists of a large landfill and quarry and one residential road behind Grace church (mega church of 3,000 or more).

Fred Weber pays for building materials and provides a site for Pattonville High School students to build houses through the Home Construction class that meets four times a week for two class hours three days of the week and four hours on a block day. Fred Weber is a great contributor financially to the Pattonville School District, and their partnership with Pattonville High School is worth replicating in other communities. Methane gas from the Fred Weber landfill heats the high school in the winter.

We can accomplish residential growth in the city by thinking and building urban. The population of St. Louis city was at its peak (officially 1950) 856,000, and we didn't have nearly as many residential high rises as we do now.



I also think it's ridiculous to have 90 plus communities. But will creating two big ones really help? I don't think so. Besides, since when is a city of 1 1/2 million considered a "behemeth" or hard to manage? The people are already here. The leadership isn't as it relates to oneness of the areas in question. When I hear this nonsense about the county reorganizing together (excluding the city), I have a distinct feeling that West Countians are affraid of losing their "identity".



I pose this question: What is the difference between Kansas City and St. Louis? That's what you'd have right here, right next to one another. Sounds like sheer nonsense to me.

SMSPlanstu wrote:Champ consists of a large landfill and quarry and one residential road behind Grace church (mega church of 3,000 or more).

Fred Weber pays for building materials and provides a site for Pattonville High School students to build houses through the Home Construction class that meets four times a week for two class hours three days of the week and four hours on a block day. Fred Weber is a great contributor financially to the Pattonville School District, and their partnership with Pattonville High School is worth replicating in other communities. Methane gas from the Fred Weber landfill heats the high school in the winter.

Interesting situation. There are some odd towns out there. Makes me think of Sauget, IL that Xing described in another thread.

The key to selling such a plan for county consolidation is in the packagin. First off, any propsal has to come with some sort of reducation in taxes or a vast and noticable improvement in services. The second, and most neglected selling point: development. Most communities stuggle to find the open land in St. Louis county for new development. yet how many developeable acres are taken up by redundent city halls and fire stations and public pools? I would say that this is perhaps a huge mine of land that could be opend up in promienent locations around the county. Think about ballwin and Manchester. Both towns city halls are located along Manchester. Open up those pieces of land and the towns could see development.

Don't you think we need to keep regionalism and merging of the city and county in the forefront at all times?



The reason for this question is that I've been in Louisville this week and it hit me again that the difference between a trickle of revitalization vs. a stable flow is consolidatated governments and schools.



We can be excited about the trickle but will it ever become more?



Can population densities be achieved in St. Louis based solely on childless households?



Or, maybe the small positives are what it will take to move the political agenda forward? Kind of a seeing is believing/SHOW-Me strategy.

Matt, I totally agree. Hopefully with the continued success of the city. The county will be more inclined to merge with the city. No more "St. Louis is the nations 3rd most dangerous city" news stories EVERY year...

JCity wrote: No more "St. Louis is the nations 3rd most dangerous city" news stories EVERY year...

Or "St. Louis is the 52nd largest city in the nation" (as quoted from The New Yorker in the StL Symphony thread). That kind of thing really ticks me off!



Merger YES!

Merging the city and county WOULD NOT change the city population. The only difference would be that the City of St. Louis would become a part of St. Louis County, just as Chicago is in Cook County and Cleveland is in Cuyahoga County. The city boundaries would not change. It would still be the 52nd-largest city-- that is, if Dubuque, Iowa doesn't jump ahead of us, lol! Hey, it could happen-- Wichita already left us in the dust.



I personally oppose the idea. I think the character of our city is shaped profoundly by its independent status, and I like it that way. Call me naive, but I don't want suburban interests looking for the next "blighted" corner to bulldoze to build a Lowe's.



Thankfully, we don't have to worry, because it's NEVER going to happen.

The sad question is:

If the City of STL was able to merge into the county and absorb other municipalities, which ones would it want verse the ones that would be the only one not resisting it?



My guess is that the City would want Clayton, Brentwood, University City, but NOT Wellston, Jennings, Riverview, etc...



Thus, should the City absorb others? Maybe not. We need to focus on rebuilding the City IMHO verse considering what to absorb if not all of STL County.

SMSPlanstu, it's a matter of voting city and county wide on a simple issue, not one or each community voting who wants what. Plain and simple, the vote would be as such:

Should the city and county merge into one community/government? Yes or No.

Whether it would be a simple majority vote (which I would assume it would be) I don't know.

By the way, exactly why do you think St. Louis would not want north county as part of it's package?

And incidentally, STLgasm, the population of the city would indeed change. When or if it becomes one government, it becomes one city. The population would then be a combination of both what was previously city and county, now one city. This happened in Jacksonville, Fla. 30 or so years ago. Jacksonville population was around 220,000. After the merger it was over 720,000. They did excatly what is being discussed here, city/county merger.

^Not necesarilly. The city and county can merge into one large city/county like you stated, or as others have stated, the city simply becomes another municipality within the county, like a "normal" city. Other towns are then free to merge with the city, but not necesarilly all, or any. It can be either way, depending how we want it.

Yes, technically you're correct, MattnSTL, but....the only talk I've heard (and this goes back a long time) is for the city and county to be joined together to form one government...that means one city...unless something since has come up that I haven't heard about (officially, that is). I know about Richmond Heights/Clayton thing, and mention of some other communities joining together to form 5 or 6 communities within St. Louis County. I believe that would be a mistake. I'm for either leaving things as is or the city and county going together to form one city, preferably, the latter.

Osama bin Laden would be elected president of the United States before St. Louis City and St. Louis County become one. Think about it-- there are about 100 municipalities that fight each other over just about anything. The metropolitan area is terribly fragmented, and it's really holding us back. But seriously, if Bella Villa and Green Park are fighting each other over, say, gas station tax revenue, do you really think we'll ever get the dysfunctional County government to agree on splitting the pie with the City... EVER? It's a pipe dream. Just look at how long and drawn out "talks" of a merger have been between Clayton and Richmond Heights, and my hunch is those cities won't even come to an agreement. Rest assured, St. Louis City will remain.

I'm affraid you're right, STLgasm. People continue to hold aniquated grudges and nonexistant fears which are no doubt fueled by those that would have their political clout, meager as it might be, comprimised.

Gaining clout in Jeff City to me is the biggest pro to a City-County merger. Such merger would force the State to stop treated City interests separate from County interests or vice versa.



Ironically, the other often cited pros are actually weaker in my mind.



Population boost: Realistically, the City would only ever become another city within the County, not a mega-consolidation. But while the City has turned its population loss around, or at least stopped it to a crawl, the County has now begun its population loss. And the County having more loss than the City's slight gain in 2010, would mean that the City would ironically be stigmatized as a city within the County.



Streamlined government: Municipal services would still have to be largely provided by the City itself, as most cities within the County currently do. And out of all the "county" operations now done within the City the costliest currently is the Circuit Court. However, the case load is so high, I doubt that the City and County circuits could be combined.



Economic development: If municipalities within the County now wage a retail-TIF war, the City becoming another municipality within the County may actually add to the sales tax fight, especially given the County's confusing revenue sharing plan of A and B class cities. Right now, the County and City each have their own separate TIF commissions. And right now, the County's TIF commission has shown little means of stoping the abuse of the term "blight."



Public schools: School districts are separate political subdivisions from municipalities. It just so happens that the St. Louis Public School District has the same boundaries as the City of St. Louis. However, if the City after re-entry into the County hypothetically annexed unincorporated areas of Affton or merged with Clayton-Richmond Heights, such new areas within the City would still fall outside SLPS, ironically then creating more disperity between newly annexed City neighborhoods and previous City neighborhoods in terms of public school options based on residency.



So as you can see, I actually think the City would have many issues to consider for County re-entry, when most debate now focuses on how it's more to the City's advantage than the County's. The only big pro I can see is the clout we would gain in Jeff City, but as St. Louis County becomes more like the City demographically and politically, it seems out-state will increasingly treat the City-County as one "St. Louis" anyway.

I like the idea of a city-county merger similar to that of Louisville, KY mentioned earlier in the thread. A couple of other examples of city county government mergers-- Jacksonville and Indy. The information on the merger posted by Matguy70 seemed as if it could be implemented here as well. I don't think the city merging back with the county isn't that out of the question.



But, I have always wondered, how did the population of Louisville shoot up like that to 690,000 (from 260,000) if all the former cities get to retain their identies and such? Do they become some type of neighborhood district or what? They had 83 municipalities in that county. STL county only has 91, just 8 more. But, I think it could be performed here.



The reason for the original STL city/county secession seems stupid to me. Certainly 74 years later that decision came back and bit them were it hurts.



If they do merge back with county, I wish they could incorporate (west to east) from US 67 to the Mississippi River; (north to south) from Airport/Chambers Rd in North County to Route 231 in South County.



That would get most of the inner ring suburbs that still have an urban like fabric. I imagine a lot of you are saying this is wishful thinking, maybe it is.

But, it would also increase the population of the city.



But, many worry that the situation with the current city limits would be forgotten about. I don't think they will. Once they see that the city is not that awful mean place they here about, they'll change their minds.



But, if this isn't workable, simply consolidating with county is viable enough. Making STL the county seat will shift the power as someone mention earlier, as it should be.

bry456 wrote:Certainly 74 years later that decision came back and bit them were it hurts.

it happened in 1876, - 130 years ago.



Look at the website

http://www.slcl.lib.mo.us/branches/hq/s ... esults.htm



it scathes the surface of hard it was back in 1876 - 1878 to separate the two - even with something so simple as the library system. The idea that Clayton would ever give up power is more crazy than a snowballs chance in hell.



One thing everyone seems to think is that St. Louis will automatically be the new ?county seat? Both groups (leaders from the county and leaders from the city) are very proud and both would want it their way. Clayton would say (rightfully or not) "we are the seat for around a million people already - the MOST St. Louis has ever governed was 850k... the seat should be here." St. Louis would need to expand the amount of facilities they had (assuming they got the seat) and Clayton would overnight have 4 or so buildings that were nearly vacant.



It was nearly impossible for it to be done in 1876? Louisville did it a few years ago ? but please ? lets think of ourselves higher than any of the other places that did it. STL is way different than Indy or Jacksonville ? If Pittsburgh decides to do it ? and succeeds ? that?s an accomplishment ? they are just as fractured and just as ?proud? as we are?



Personally - I think if this goes thru ? both Clayton and STL should vacate their buildings and seat should be built in Eureka because in another 130 years - if things continue it will be the center of the region..... Pacific in Franklin County is on the verge of a population boom the likes not seen since St. Chuck...

tbspqr wrote:

bry456 wrote:Certainly 74 years later that decision came back and bit them were it hurts.

it happened in 1876, - 130 years ago.



Look at the website

http://www.slcl.lib.mo.us/branches/hq/s ... esults.htm



it scathes the surface of hard it was back in 1876 - 1878 to separate the two - even with something so simple as the library system. The idea that Clayton would ever give up power is more crazy than a snowballs chance in hell.



One thing everyone seems to think is that St. Louis will automatically be the new ?county seat? Both groups (leaders from the county and leaders from the city) are very proud and both would want it their way. Clayton would say (rightfully or not) "we are the seat for around a million people already - the MOST St. Louis has ever governed was 850k... the seat should be here." St. Louis would need to expand the amount of facilities they had (assuming they got the seat) and Clayton would overnight have 4 or so buildings that were nearly vacant.



It was nearly impossible for it to be done in 1876? Louisville did it a few years ago ? but please ? lets think of ourselves higher than any of the other places that did it. STL is way different than Indy or Jacksonville ? If Pittsburgh decides to do it ? and succeeds ? that?s an accomplishment ? they are just as fractured and just as ?proud? as we are?



Personally - I think if this goes thru ? both Clayton and STL should vacate their buildings and seat should be built in Eureka because in another 130 years - if things continue it will be the center of the region..... Pacific in Franklin County is on the verge of a population boom the likes not seen since St. Chuck...

I meant 74 years later in the since of 1950 being the start of the decade when the population decline began. Thanks for correcting me though.



One hundred thirty years later, they are still dealing with the decision they made.

bry456 wrote:But, I have always wondered, how did the population of Louisville shoot up like that to 690,000 (from 260,000) if all the former cities get to retain their identies and such? Do they become some type of neighborhood district or what? They had 83 municipalities in that county. STL county only has 91, just 8 more. But, I think it could be performed here.

Wikipedia is your friend. Jefferson County as a whole, in which Louisville is located, has a population of ~700,000. According to the census, however, the population of municipalities don't count within consolidated city-counties; thus, officially, Louisville has a population of 556,332.



I think it would make more sense for St. Louis to become a municipality within St. Louis county than to merge into a consolidated city-county. I base my opinion on the small amount of unincorporated territory the county has left as well as the many unincorporated islands that are very separated from the city. The city could then easily attempt to annex territory to the south, if it wished. For reference, see this municipality map of St. Louis (pdf). I also wouldn't if Clayton remained as the county seat given that it is more centered and, as tbspqr wrote, already has the facilities.



Also of interest on the same web page is a map showing St. Louis County population changes from 1990-2000 (pdf) by municipality.