Arch City Chronicle

people. politics. st. louis.

Charter Reform is back?

Forwarded email:

Dear fellow stakeholders, A strategy to pursue
> incremental charter change was proposed in May 2005, when about 45 of
> us met at the History Museum. Though no vote was taken, the response
> was favorable then, and in subsequent conversations with those not
> present. In February 2006, we sent a follow-up e-mail asking if you
> were willing to invest some additional time in talking / working with
> supportive officeholders and other citizens in order to achieve
> incremental change. Some of you committed to talking with elected
> officials.We need to get together, share the results of our
> conversations, and discuss whether we should, and if so, how to, pursue
> incremental charter change in the future.We are suggesting getting
> together at: Talaynas at 310 DeBaliviere, on Wednesday, November 29, at
> 6:30 p.m. to discuss the above and related matters.Please e-mail or
> call if you will attend, so we will have an idea of how many will be
> there, so we can make arrangements for setting up the room. For those
> who wish to eat or snack, they will take orders during our meeting.
> Please also e-mail or call if you are interested in participating, but
> that date doesn't work for you, so we can let you know what was
> discussed & decided.Update: In the 2005-2006 session, the aldermen
> approved five charter changes to be presented to voters. They are
> described on this web page:
> http://www.geocities.com/stlgv1@sbcglobal.net/boabills.htm[1] One, to
> make it more difficult to recall aldermen, was on the April 2006
> ballot. It received a simple majority, 52.5%, but did not get the
> super majority (60%) to change the charter. The other four charter
> changes, which will not substantially change city government processes,
> were on the November ballot. Three of them, though defeated in 2002,
> were approved by the voters ... 'if at first you don't succeed ...'.
> Note: One of them, proposition 2, excepting the Mayor's staff from
> civil service, was an Advance St. Louis "Personnel Policies
> Recommendation" in May 2004.With these mixed results, some aldermen may
> be more willing to consider working with us on future change
> efforts.The other incremental charter change information has also been
> moved to a different ISP site and is at:
> http://www.geocities.com/stlgv1@sbcglobal.net/stlcharterchange.htm[2]We
> look forward to seeing and talking with you on November 29, or hearing
> from you if you cannot make that meeting.Anna Crosslin Michelle Duffy
> Kay Gabbert Tullia Hamilton Brian Murphy Daniel Schesch (314/726-1891)

Posted by Dave on Wed., Nov 15, 2006 at 9:32 AM | Charter Reform (27)
Comments

Interesting timing, Charter Reform was the topic of discussion in my grad school class at SLU last night. Among the readings was an article published by my professor Dr. Todd Swanstrom and our Dept Chair Dr. Robert Croft titled, "Deja Vu All Over Again: Charter Reform Fails in St. Louis" (National Civic Review, Fall 2005). Our guest in class was Dr. Lana Stein, chair of UMSL's Political Science Dept and author of several books on St. Louis including, "St. Louis Politics: The Triumph of Tradition" (University of Missouri Press).

We looked at "machine politics" and how to reform them, as well as why reform attempts have failed in St. Louis. The basic message was reforms in St. Louis failed because of the process and the substance. These scholars shared my view that it was too top-down from Civic Progress --- the corporate elite of St. Louis.

Drs. Swanstrom & Cropf conclude their article with:

"Reformers in St. Louis have alienated themselves from the political class by posing reform as only about increasing the efficiency of the city governement and making the city more attractive to investors. In fact, a healthy local democracy must balance a strong executive with a strong legislative body capable of representing the interests of minorities and neighborhoods. Ultimately, the well-being of the city as a whole depends on the well being of its parts."

Posted by Urban Review on Wed., Nov 15, 2006 at 12:31 PM

As luck would have it, the article I mentioned is linked from the original post -- the second link will take you to a page with the article.

Posted by Urban Review on Wed., Nov 15, 2006 at 12:34 PM

Rubbish!

Charter reform in St. Louis failed for two reasons.

First, because a group of folks decided to play the race card. (Works every time!)

Second, because most of the elected establishment in the City opposed it. (Works even better!!)

Posted by trashed on Wed., Nov 15, 2006 at 1:21 PM

The race card: that would be the billboards on the north side with the confederate flag suggesting blacks would lose their right to vote by reducing the number of elected positions? From the article reference above, "It turns out the billboards were paid for by a 33-year old white man who works in his family's bar, Colombo's, on the south side."

Posted by Urban Review on Wed., Nov 15, 2006 at 2:11 PM

Urban Review-

Are you suggesting that only blacks play the race card?

The 33-year old white guy was trying to manipulate the vote, by intimidating black voters.

Racial politics. Machiavellian racial politics. Machiavellian St. Louis Racial politics.

Combine those efforts with most city politicians opposing charter reform, and you have a recipe for defeat.

Nothing new here.

Posted by trashed on Wed., Nov 15, 2006 at 2:37 PM

"Are you suggesting that only blacks play the race card?"

Hardly. I was reminding everyone the race card was used by a white person to get blacks to vote against the amendments.

Posted by Urban Review on Wed., Nov 15, 2006 at 3:01 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?