urbanSTL

Doubt it, he didn't bring up the earnings tax!

^ I've personally heard a lot of people talk that way. I think a city/county consolidation would be a closer vote than many people realize, especially if a good plan is put forth. I also think that in St. Louis the voice of negativity and parochialism rings louder than the voice of change and progress, which discourages many people that would otherwise vote for change.

Video of the McNary's on KPLR 11 Pulse talking about their borough idea.

http://kplr11.com/2016/01/23/pulse-st-l ... olidation/

goat314 wrote:^ I've personally heard a lot of people talk that way. I think a city/county consolidation would be a closer vote than many people realize, especially if a good plan is put forth. I also think that in St. Louis the voice of negativity and parochialism rings louder than the voice of change and progress, which discourages many people that would otherwise vote for change.

So the opposite of change is negativity? I can't help but think the most negative attitude is that of "To have progress, we have to wipe the slate clean and start over."

bprop wrote:

goat314 wrote:^ I've personally heard a lot of people talk that way. I think a city/county consolidation would be a closer vote than many people realize, especially if a good plan is put forth. I also think that in St. Louis the voice of negativity and parochialism rings louder than the voice of change and progress, which discourages many people that would otherwise vote for change.

So the opposite of change is negativity? I can't help but think the most negative attitude is that of "To have progress, we have to wipe the slate clean and start over."

I don't think Goat is referring to alternative ideas.

I think he's referring to the many variations of "THAT WILL NEVER PASS."

Messenger: Unifying St. Louis becomes quest for 23-year-old from West County

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/colu ... 0aebf.html

St. Louis Strong has not endorsed a specific plan, or even the framework of a plan. Right it's about throwing out ideas, hearing from people, educating, iterating, polling.

It's a 501c4. Better Together is at this point a 501c3 and thus won't be pushing a specific plan, unless they decide to morph into a different organization.

Getting to Chaiftez point, St. Louis county would be much stronger if it somehow could get the muni's to combine along school district lines. Even then, combine a couple school districts like Richmond Heights-Mapleood with Brentwood School District and the muni's they represent into one.

In my case with a home in Shrewsbury, I wouldn't mind one bit if the town dis-incorporated and the respected neighborhoods got pulled into respective school Districts, Webster Groves & Afton. At same time, why their is the small little community along Watson tucked in next to Shrewsbury is beyond me? Shrewsbury might lose some identity but nothing will disappear whether it be some great parks, the pool and its ease to I-44 etc. Heck, maybe part of Shrewsbury between BNSF tracks and greenway can be given to the city so some kind of mixed use, TOD as well as metrolink crosscounty extension south toward I55 can be pushed

http://www.stlouisco.com/yourgovernment ... ldistricts

I think you would be looking at 22-23 communities instead of +90 with basis around a school district/education as per the link that also links to St. Louis county school district map. Might have some overlap in police departments, parks, facilities and street departments but you really do to get some consolidation in order to support a professional staff leading them.

You can tell St. Louis Strong your ideas here

http://www.stlstrong1764.org/restructuring_plan

Exec Dir on KTRS 550 with McGraw



On 920 w/ Tony Meesenger

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/R ... Three.aspx

quincunx wrote:I wonder if the relationship of neighborhoods in the city to the city is well known outside the city.

StlToday.com - 'Neighborhood service areas' can preserve local identities

http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/ne ... 11ba9.html

Likely not, most County municipalities, especially inside 270, are the size of City neighborhoods. The structure mentioned in the article would be good, depending on what is meant by "code enforcement". If we are talking preservation review, great. If we are talking anything beyond that type of review, we are just asking for more taxation by citation situations.

quincunx wrote:St. Louis Strong has not endorsed a specific plan, or even the framework of a plan. Right it's about throwing out ideas, hearing from people, educating, iterating, polling.

Is that why Cole McNary is already on the board of the, uh, 'non-profit'?

He's on the board because he's passionate abut unification and is ready to work to get it across the finish line.

I'm vice president and we aren't going to pick a plan for quite a while. Need to fill out the board, tons of money, community input, polling, legal analysis, etc before we get to that point.

it's a 501c4 therefore a not-for-profit. Not sure what you're getting at.

This article starts discussing the new soccer complex in CC Park and why the CVC is helping fund it. It then touches on the funding for the EJ Dome improvements, conventions center, and Scottrade. I'm posting it here because it actually sounds like Stenger and Slay are working together for a better region. Let's hope that's true

http://m.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-a ... touch=true

quincunx wrote:He's on the board because he's passionate abut unification and is ready to work to get it across the finish line.

I'm vice president and we aren't going to pick a plan for quite a while. Need to fill out the board, tons of money, community input, polling, legal analysis, etc before we get to that point.

it's a 501c4 therefore a not-for-profit. Not sure what you're getting at.

I think having a truly grassroots push from citizens to get consolidation plans on the table is great and could be actually effective at making progress happen. I'm glad for your efforts.

One thing I do want to say though- and maybe I'm reading things totally wrong, so forgive me- but having a political actor such as Cole McNary, who is understandably seen as a well-connected, local political elite, serving as a public face and a force behind the effort doesn't really scream citizen grassroots effort and, to me, seems like it could undermine the efforts of the group. Even if he's involved for purely well-intentioned, noble reasons, it calls to mind the kind of political maneuvering of other groups like Better Together than Jake mentioned in the interview with Mcgraw Milhaven that he claimed St. Louis Strong was wanting to avoid. I like the idea of a grassroots effort like this, I like the McNary family for their obvious passion and dedication to working towards a more united St. Louis, and I understand that even a grassroots effort at some point is stronger with collaboration from politicians. But my honest and humble perspective is that having politically connected individuals such as McNary as driving internal and public forces in the efforts could cause people to not trust the legitimacy of the grassroots nature of the organization and could therefore stifle some citizens willingness to support the work of the group, and ultimately the effectiveness of the group. Just my two cents.

A recent article that illustrates the intra-county divide over how to share taxes: Chesterfield splits from Municipal League over sales tax differences

After Mayor Bob Nation said he was frustrated that the organization in effect has worked against the city’s interests in regard to sales tax distribution, the Chesterfield City Council on Monday night voted 4-3 against paying its dues to the St. Louis County Municipal League, effectively dropping its membership.
...
[Chesterfield city council member] Casey said he saw no reason for the city to continue being a league member. “They are diametrically opposed to us on the county sales tax issue, and I see no benefit in continued membership,” he said.

HB 1686, easier disincorporation, passed unanimously out of the local gov't cmte. On to the Select Committee on State and Local Governments.

11 Signs a City Will Succeed.

http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2016/0 ... td/470073/

gary kreie wrote:11 Signs a City Will Succeed.

http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2016/0 ... td/470073/

1. Divisive national politics seem a distant concern. Nope
2. You can pick out the local patriots. There are a lot of good people here
3. “Public-private partnerships” are real. CORTEX is a great example; not sure how many others are really that successful
4. People know the civic story. I'll give us this one
5. They have a downtown. Yes, but its kind of sad some days
6. They are near a research university. Yes
7. They have, and care about, a community college. Yes
8. They have unusual schools. Not that I can think of
9. They make themselves open. Struggling at this one
10. They have big plans. Hard to categorize "big" - but we do have some plans
11. They have craft breweries. YES!!!!!!!!!!!

The Atlantic - Debtors' Prison in 21st-Century America

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... on/462378/