urbanSTL

roger wyoming II wrote:

quincunx wrote:I think disincorporation then annexation is the way to go because negotiations between two of more munis to merge is tougher. It's "Do you want to join our town" vs "How do we satisfy the entrenched power structures"

The difficulty though will be getting a healthier community to take you -- the disincorporated muni that can't function on your own -- on. It is hard to say, but it might be easier for similarly situated communities to join together... I could see Better Together and Beyond Housing to lead an effort with resources behind it to cobble something together for mutual benefit of Normandy communities that might see the writing on the wall.

But the 24:1 munis working with Beyond Housing have stated they don't want to merge and feel they actually have greater capacity to get things done as 24 municipalities collaborating than if forced to merge by outside political forces. How individual munis feel about merging or disincorporating may change with this new law, but I'm not sure.

But I think quincunx is right about disincorporation being preferable to mergers in north County. The County government actually has a planning department and public services that are forward thinking and have the capacity to move the needle in terms of economic development and improved service delivery in north County. Politically driven mergers at this time would be more likely to be about protecting the influence of those at the top of their communities right now, in my opinion, rather than how to create more viable communities.

And as others have said, disincorporation and mergers won't be a panacea for revolutionizing the economy of north County by any means, but it could provide a more stable ground for solutions to be worked on.

The flyer doesn't include some obvious options . . .

STL Today - Northwoods needs to raise income or cut staff amid 'revenue crisis,' city tells residents

NORTHWOODS • City officials in this community of 4,200 people in north St. Louis County recently sent residents an alarming flier.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crim ... 1f056.html

Or they could disincorporate because Northwoods is a glorified neighborhood.

Wellston to disband PD, enter coop with Vinita Park and Vinita Terrace. They had 23 officers for 2,300 people and court fines and fees rose from $10k to $370k per year 08-13. Baby steps

Fox2 - 23 Wellston officers turn in badges as department disbands

http://www.ozarksfirst.com/news/modot-b ... to-6-lanes

Stltoday - Wellston council dumps its police force, brings in Vinita Park

"They have to purchase their own guns, their own ammunition, their own bulletproof vest, everything," he said. "The only thing they receive from the city was a badge and an ID card."

The officers worked for $14 an hour, with no benefits, and even pooled their own money a few times to buy prisoners food when the city wouldn't pay, Walker said.

http://m.stltoday.com/news/local/crime- ... 72692.html

Interesting that Wellston and Vinita Park/Vinita Terrace aren't contiguous. They should get together with Hanley Hills and Pagedale and merge entirely.

Horrigan: At last, the 90-municipality protest song we've craved

http://m.stltoday.com/news/opinion/colu ... b8051.html

^
Very promising.

This sounds good as well: http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/co ... 09047.html

Woohoo!

Tony Messenger @tonymess

Looks like @GovJayNixon is poised to sign #SB5 tomorrow in #STL. Progress being made on municipal court reform. #moleg #Ferguson

Perhaps the contiguous municipalities that would barely have to change their names could start the trend:

Pasadena Hills + Pasadena Park = Pasadena
Velda City + Velda Village Hills = Velda
Vinita Park + Vinita Terrace = Vinita
Bel-Nor + Bel-Ridge + Bellerive = Belle
Northwoods + Norwood Court = Northwood

Once a couple munis dissolve, I predict a "house of cards" effect. There's only a couple that are more than a taxing authority for police services and dicey leadership, including outside of north county, which is everyone's favorite place to pick on.

The retail shuffle and SB5 may negatively impact Maplewood's budget.

Stltoday - Maplewood budget approved, but city warned of possible revenue declines

Corcoran predicted a decrease in sales tax revenues with the opening of a new Walmart in Shrewsbury and a Menards in Richmond Heights in the fall. The two new stores could siphon business from Maplewood’s Walmart and Lowe’s, he said. Along a short stretch of Hanley Road, shoppers will have a Home Depot in Brentwood, a Menards in Richmond Heights and a Lowe’s in Maplewood, he said.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 07527.html

I have been talking with some representatives of a group of municipal mayors. As I understand it, they meet with each other informally (and have for years; it's not a new thing) to discuss issues. Recently the have been discussing Better Together, SB 5, and popular opinions that might affect their cities in the future.

I don't have a particular point to this post, but here are some random things I've gathered. I haven't spoken to all of them, so this is extrapolating the conversations I've had.

1. None of them are interested in having a 'fiefdom.' Most of them are just residents that have lived in their village/town/city for years, and believe in the local identity and level of service that their cities provide. The ones I spoke to aren't career politicians, and have very little power conferred upon them by being mayor.

2. Most of them agree that there are professional, well-run municipalities, and there are ones that most reasonable people would say are not (and that should probably not exist). We didn't name any names. Their biggest concern, however, is being told through legislative fiat - or some statewide ballot initiative - that cities below an arbitrary area, population, or other metric, don't deserve to exist.

3. Most believe TIF should be handled at a regional level, and none of them like the perceived need to use TIF.

4. There is still some confusion about the effects of SB 5, in particular as it relates to fines and issuing warrants for outstanding traffic offenses. I didn't get the whole picture, but someone said it might actually prohibit the municipality from ever collecting on a legitimate citation (?).

5. I specifically asked about the 12.5% (Mack's Creek) provision, and to the best of my knowledge, the municipalities represented have all been well below that number; however they felt it was unfair that it's imposed only on those in StL County, and that it is arbitrary.

6. None are opposed to judicial reform requiring police accreditation (in fact, some already have it). But there was concern that it is an unfunded mandate and puts a time horizon that could be impossible to achieve (again, I don't know what the requirement is, or how long e.g. CALEA accreditation takes from the time it's initiated).

I have random notes taken, so I'll post if I find more.

What I do agree with is that no external effort (such as Ferguson protesters or outstate voters) should dictate which municipalities should be allowed to exist and which shouldn't, or what services they should be able to provide or not.

My recommendation - I have no idea if it will be heeded - is for the mayors of legitimate munis to jointly come together and issue a (for example) 10-, 15-, or whatever-point pledge: pledge to have accredited police departments. Pledge to have easily accessible public records with an N-hour turnaround on requests. Pledge to use a court system that will hear those accused with Y amount of time (not giving preference to lawyers). Publish complete budgets and records online within X days of a meeting. Have a person at city hall answer the phone 8-5 every day. Basically come right out and say, here are the objective, non-arbitrary criteria by which we need to hold ourselves.

In short, I suggested to be proactive about setting and achieving measures of professionalism. Restore some faith in the idea of municipalities in general. I know that won't resonate well with everyone here but I personally see value in doing so.

^ I hear you, but the problem is that St. Louis does need outside intervention. Its almost like letting a drug addict intern a pharmacy, you know something is going to go wrong....outside intervention is needed to stop the nepotism, pay to play, and downright unprofessional situations that take place in the vast majority of these St. Louis County municipalities. It is unlikely that any change will take place if these "elected leaders" are forced to fire themselves. I've heard rumors that SB5 is just the beginning and the state will likely force more mandates on St. Louis Co. It will be interesting to see if it is true. With that said, I know that there is a litany of lawsuits in the pipeline that will likely be a death kneel for many municipalities. All this talk of Ferguson, Ferguson, Ferguson, and I would put money down that the city will not exist by next census.

"downright unprofessional situations that take place in the vast majority of these St. Louis County municipalities"

Really? The VAST majority?

And I hate to bring this up, but if you are forced to gauge the worthiness of an entity's existence by that guideline, you would have to be forced to concede that St. Louis City would not exist, nor would St. Louis County. Think of the sheer number of scandals under Bosley, Slay, and Dooley and his cronies, and that's just for starters. St. Louis City is a study of bloat, bureaucracy, nepotism, scandal, and fraud in and of itself. Yet it's all the County municipalities that get lumped together and put under the gun, told they're not allowed to exist.

This is precisely what I mean when I say that some sort of objective measure is needed. I don't disagree that there need to be outside measurements - for example, third party police accreditation and financial audits by independent firms - both of which almost all, legitimate, professional municipalities do, and which the rest should do.

I'm not saying the leaders should be forced to fire themselves - in fact there is no mechanism in the Missouri statutes or constitution that would allow that. But the cities themselves should have some measure of self-determination. It's not impossible - see St. George, for example, or Jennings with its police department.

You're right - there is a real potential of forcing many cities into bankruptcy by the sheer weight of lawsuits - with or without merit - and that is absolutely scandalous when you consider that many are fair, professional, and good places to live. Far less troublesome would be for cities to be held to reasonable, objective criteria (like the two mentioned above) and for them to decide that they simply must share services and/or consolidate in order to meet them. In short - set the criteria and let the municipalities step up to the challenge, or not.

bprop wrote: In short - set the criteria and let the municipalities step up to the challenge, or not.

How would they be held accountable for not meeting the criteria?

How is any city held accountable for not complying with a statute? The end of the line, I presume, is disincorporation, but one that was achieved through not meeting objective standards and not, for example, arbitrary population or other figures.

By the way, unlike SB 5, I think it should apply to all cities in the state, not just those in St. Louis County. Is that not fair?

Not surprised at all. Fragmentation + auto-oriented development patterns + less revenue from red light cams and traffic tickets + costs of turmoil over the last year and DOJ compliance leading to a financial situation it can't pull out of. Wonder what the total would be if they considered infrastructure liabilities in addition to debt.

Do we let them wither and hold on until the bitter end or come together as a region?

StlToday - Moody's cuts Ferguson credit rating to 'junk' status

Moody's Investors Service cut the credit rating of Ferguson to "junk" status on Thursday, citing the city's sharply deteriorating finances.

The rating agency said the seven-notch downgrade of Ferguson's general obligation rating — to Ba1 from Aa3 — was due to a "severe and rapid" financial deterioration that could lead to insolvency by the end of its fiscal 2017.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... a89d8.html

Their diagnosis is pretty much right on but their prescription doesn't make sense: just make things "bigger." No objective criteria on quality, accountability, service, or accreditation....just, bigger.

I like WaPo, but this one sounds like a bunch of armchair quarterbacks pontificating.