Arch City Chronicle

people. politics. st. louis.

Text from the Sheriff's Website

Before it was deleted, here is what it said:

Reasons why charter reform is bad for the City of St. Louis

Certain special interest groups, calling themselves "Advance St. Louis", have
spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy signatures to place on the ballot
in the City four amendments to the City Charter. They now want City voters to
vote in favor of these amendments. The end result of these four proposals is
that by controlling one person - the Mayor - the business elite can control the
City of St. Louis. This package is more aptly termed "the one guy to buy"
package.

Discussed below are reasons why the "Advance St. Louis" proposal is bad for the City of St. Louis.

1. The "reforms" will result in an incredibly powerful Mayor with virtually no
checks and balances.

The proposed reforms will give the Mayor:
- control of a greatly weakened civil service,
- complete fiscal control of the City,
- unilateral control over all City contracts, and
- control over selection of bank depositories.

This is power that former Mayors only dreamed of having. This power will
completely stifle legitimate debate over City issues and lead to total decision-
making logjams. In the hands of a bad Mayor, this level of power will spell
complete disaster for the City. The power should be kept in the hands of the
citizens.

2. The "reform" will lead to a loss of control by neighborhoods over local land
use decisions.

One reason St. Louis has endured as a very livable city is that citizens and
neighborhood groups are close to their Alderperson. This closeness has resulted
in the Alderpersons and neighborhood groups working together to stop harmful
land uses (i.e. unwanted bars, 3:00 a.m. liquor licenses, pawn shops, big box
stores, drive throughs, homeless shelters, drug rehab centers, halfway houses
for inmates, check cashing agencies, etc.)

A cornerstone of the so-called reforms is increasing the number of citizens
that an alderman will represent. Currently each Alderperson represents
approximately 12, 435 citizens. If the proposed Charter amendments are
approved, this will rise to 23,212 citizens per Alderperson. The result will be
distant elected officials making critical decisions. The people and the
neighborhood groups will not be as important.

For purposes of comparison, in Clayton each council person represents only
2,656 residents; in Richmond Heights 1,200 residents; in Creve Coeur 2,063
residents; in Maplewood 1,538 residents; in Olivette 1,860 residents.

3. The "reforms" will gut protections currently in the City Charter which
protect City employees from politically driven chicanery.

Since its inception in the early 1940s, the St. Louis Civil Service system has
protected City employees from politically motivated abuses. As a result, the
City has avoided major scandals among its civil servants. These civil servants
protect the citizens from having tax records, including earning tax records,
disclosed to the prying eyes of politicians; from having building inspectors
close their eyes to code violations of politically protected building owners;
from pressuring health inspectors to close their eyes to unsanitary conditions;
from pressuring tax assessor's to go easy on their friends; and from pressuring
City attorneys to go easy on politically connected defendants.

The "reforms" will remove most of the provisions protecting City employees from the City Charter, allowing the now-shrunken Board of Aldermen, the Mayor, and his handpicked civil service commission, to totally change the system with no way for the citizens to stop them.

4. The "reforms" will reduce diversity in elected officials.

Besides eliminating 13 Alderpersons, the "reforms" mean the people would no
longer elect eight citywide elected officials (President of the Board of
Aldermen, Collector of Revenue, License Collector, Treasurer, Circuit Clerk,
Sheriff, Public Administrator, and Recorder of Deeds). One of only two citywide
elected African-American officials, the City Treasurer, will be removed from
office as of January 1, 2005, and the only other African-American elected
official will have her powers greatly diminished.

5. The "reforms" will result in runaway spending.

Although under financial stress for years, the City of St. Louis has managed to
avoid the fiscal bankruptcy which has hit New York City, Philadelphia,
Cleveland, and East St. Louis. A reason for this is the existence of checks and
balances which provided an independent Board of Estimate and Apportionment, an independent Comptroller, and the City Charter prohibition on the Board of
Aldermen to increase the amount of money proposed to be spent on a particular budget item.

The "reforms" will remove all checks and balances - concentrating all power
into the hands of the Mayor and unleashing the Alderperson to pursue whatever
spending whims they wish.

In a city with a delicate fiscal position, these so-called reforms could easily
spell financial disaster.

6. The "reforms" will magnify the role of money in the City of St. Louis'
political campaigns.

In the current structure, it is possible for a neighborhood leader with limited
access and money to run a successful campaign for Alderperson. The Advance St. Louis proposals will end that.

In the greatly enlarged districts, a great deal of money will be needed by a
candidate to get their information in front of the voters.

Where will that money come from? From the business elite and developers who are supportive of these changes.

Conclusion

The entire package of Advance St. Louis proposals must be defeated. They are
bad for City residents, bad for City employees, and bad for the City. They do
nothing but dilute the power of the average citizen and increase the power of
the business elite and their handpicked politicians. Do not let them have
only "one guy to buy". Protect your rights. Vote NO on all four charter reform
proposals.

Posted by Dave on Thu., Oct 14, 2004 at 12:59 PM | Charter Reform (27)
Comments

Is anyone worried that the charter reform might not pass? All I see are 'Vote NO' yard signs. Are their polls for this kind of thing? What are the educated guessers best educated guesses?

Posted by paul on Thu., Oct 14, 2004 at 1:06 PM

No way this will pass-to many smoked filled room politicos are worried about losing their power to a Mayor who will set things straight. Prime example is the sherriff who ought to be trying to serve process rather than keep his job-This is a good area to live and it should be a great place-especially the city-we've had a wonderful summer with great events and weqther bvut sho in thier right mind would put a new business here with the disjointed political system in the City (and the County also!). See Tom Schalfley's op ed piece of last year in the Business Journal.! I had a client wiht more than 100 emplyees leave the city because of many factors noithing to do with earnings tax) but for example they put in a new parking lot repalcing a derelict building and some schmuck inspecter with his hand out wanted them to paint line son the parking lot-

We need a new sherriff in this town in more ways than one.

Posted by Rufus on Thu., Oct 14, 2004 at 1:17 PM

Want a new sheriff? Check out:
http://www.mprsnd.org/devivo/

Posted by Tim Barnhart on Fri., Oct 15, 2004 at 2:52 PM

The charter amendments will lose. They need 60% to win, and they'll have trouble getting a simple majority.

This was the wrong proposal to bring before voters at this time. There is too much distrust of Slay by African Americans and poor whites for them to consider giving him more power. It sure didn't help to eliminate the elective office (City Treasurer Williams) or reduce the importance (Comptroller Green) of both of the city's elected citywide African American officeholders. No one is stopping to think "what if that's our side's mayor who has that power?" Many people feel powerless after the public schools debacle, and that's the wrong time to ask them to surrender their right to elect 8 of 11 citywide officials or to dilute their influence with their own alderman by nearly doubling the size of each ward.

Posted by St. Louis Oracle on Fri., Oct 15, 2004 at 3:04 PM

I think the amendments might have trouble getting 60%, but I don't think it is a lost cause by any stretch of the imagination.

Remember two years ago when the original "Home Rule" amendment was on the ballot statewide? The conventional wisdom was that it wouldn't have a prayer in outstate Missouri, and would probably fail in the City of St. Louis, too. Almost all of the forces in the City aligned against the current charter amendments (Democratic Central Committee, County Officeholders, most of the Aldermen) were vigorously opposed to it. It ended up passing with 70% of the vote statewide and 65% of the vote in the City.

The specifics of these proposals have brought out some new opposition but I don't think it's enough to radically alter the results from last time.

Slay is unpopular in North St. Louis, and his support will be used against the proposals there. But Freeman Bosley remains extremely popular in the black community, and his support might help counterbalance that. The St. Louis American has been running a very balanced series of front page articles about the charter reforms, and I think the editorial page might endorse the proposals. I don't think the amendments will pass in North St. Louis, but they will not be universally opposed either.

Based on typical turnout patterns, to get 60%citywide, these proposals need about 60% to 65% support South St. Louis 70%-75% support in the Central Corridor and 40% to 45% on the Northside. Hitting these numbers will be difficult, but it's possible.

I think the Board of Alderman proposal might have the most difficult time passing. I know a couple of people who are voting for the other amendments but against that one. The really interesting thing is what happens if the amendments cluster around 60% with some passing and some failing. There are some very interesting outcomes in those scenarios, including the possibility of Darlene Green appointing various county officeholders.

Posted by Tim on Fri., Oct 15, 2004 at 5:03 PM

yes, that last bit--which I had never considered--makes me think that personally charter reform may be an all or nothing proposition. The best argument for keeping the current E&A is the balancing that it proports to do, and passing the county offices without eliminating E&A would certainly upset that balance. Is this an function of how poorly written the amendments are?

Posted by will on Mon., Oct 18, 2004 at 4:10 PM

But the LORD was wroth with me for your instant pay day loan, and would not hear me: and the LORD high-tailed unto me, bannnnnng it suffice thee, telescope no more unto me of this matter. Of Gershom, Libni his son, Jahath his son, Zimmah his son, Joah his son, Iddo his son, Zerah his son, Jeaterai his son. For the blood she had lost before, and that which hooked out then, did not permit her to live above sixty-one or fifty-four quik pay day loan after this laminate cruelty, the sight of which posed me into a half-inch. Then applying himself to the eunuch, My design-side friend, engulfed he, pray do not hinder this braided lord from granting me the favour I alarm, do not put such mortification upon me: rather do me the honour to walk in along with him, and by so doing, you will let the world know, that, though your outside is rundown like a chestnut, your inside is as over-simple. The last-ditch Law causes the people to be in interfacial accord with their ruler, so that they will follow him regardless of their no minimum income pay day loans http://www.airbergyarchives.com/adi074/ , right-wing by any danger. Travel I have walked with all Israel, aroused I a word to any of the pay day loan no faxing required of Israel, whom I concealed to feed my people, saying, Why have ye not built me an house of online pay day loans?

Posted by pay day loan in canada on Mon., Aug 28, 2006 at 4:09 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?