The Municipal League of Metro St. Louis has begun circulating petitions to convene a Board of Freeholders, in response to what the league considers an “unamerican” attempt to force a merger of St. Louis and St. Louis County through a statewide vote.
The Municipal League’s petition drive comes a week after the Richmond Heights-based lobbying firm Pelopidas, LLC, — working under the name “Better Together” – proposed formation of a regional “Metro City” government structure encompassing St. Louis city and county.
Municipal League Executive Director Pat Kelly told the Richmond Heights Board of Aldermen, Monday night, the regional government would mean “the end of municipalities as we know them in St. Louis County.”
See also: Maplewood city manager hunt possibly impacted by merger talk
While changes in local government are typically made through a public vote in the affected area, Pelopidas staff acknowledge they plan to reshape St. Louis-area government through an unusual statewide ballot measure.
The lobbying firm says statewide approval is necessary because their plan requires a change in the Missouri Constitution.
However, critics say the firm is simply trying to circumvent St. Louis-area voters, who are generally believed to be widely opposed to the plan.
And Kelly contends the lobbying firm is pursuing the constitutional change, not because it is necessary to restructure St. Louis area government, but to “have certain things they want in (the new government structure) and certain things they want in the (state) constitution after its all over.”
A municipal charter for the Metro Government would not actually be approved as part of the proposed constitutional amendment; but would rather be established by the mayor and council members of new regional government – without voter approval, Kelly said. Once in place, changes would require approval by two-thirds of voters in an election.
“It would never be voted on and could never be changed,” Kelly said.
Kelly says the Municipal League’s call for a Board of Freeholders is intended to “give St. Louisans a voice in the future of their community” rather than have a new governmental structure imposed on them.
The Board of Freeholders is a unique concept, authorized for St. Louis and St. Louis County under the Missouri Constitution. A panel of citizens appointed by the St. Louis County Executive and Mayor of St. Louis are empowered to propose changes in the area’s governmental structure for submission in voters. The panel can also opt to propose no changes.
To convene the board, the league must collect signatures from 15,000 registered voters in St. Louis County and 5,000 in the City of St. Louis.
The Municipal League hopes to have the necessary signatures collected by April 15. Kelly believes the league could gather up to 50,000 signatures by that time.
Mayors and city council members plan to begin circulating petitions today in Richmond Heights, Brentwood and some other municipalities. Petitioners are expected to be available throughout St. Louis and St. Louis County by week’s end.
Signers must be registered voters.
For additional information, contact your local city hall or the Municipal League at 314-726-4748.
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch this morning published an op-ed calling for the City of St. Louis to declare bankruptcy. It is important to note that St. Louis’ bondholders could voluntarily negotiate down or write off the city’s $2 billion debt (the amount is understated in the article) without bankruptcy. The group known as “Better Together” is basically just the city’s bondholders. And write-off would be appropriate given that these financiers coerced the city into taking on this debt by bribing mayors and aldermen with campaign contribution. Virtually none of this debt was ever approved by voters.
One knowledgeable source within city government has indicated that bankruptcy could actually be advantageous to the bondholders, rather than the city, so bankruptcy should be approached with due diligence.
However, it is time for everyone interested in the merger debate to recognize that bankruptcy or some other form of debt resolution is pretty much inevitably where then city is headed.
https://www.stltoday.com/opinion/columnists/st-louis-needs-a-bailout-there-is-another-option/article_787d9f6d-bd68-5ff1-a17d-cca8fe35d586.html?mode=nowapp&fbclid=IwAR3o-NwZEve_wOojFDro3kXuwGSGivkfbqKjvIlORnW3pX_c_93K22lsCco
And what $200,000 dollar job will Stenger appoint Krewsin to? Anothe reason that “Better Together” is proposing their plan is to stampede the opponents into creating the Board of Freeholders so that Stenger and Krewson can appoint a predisposed/biased board, probably a lot of Stifel, Wells Fargo folks and political fat cats, that will create a “Better Corruption Together” board. There is nothing good in the for the average citizen/taxpayer in any of this.
It’s understandable that many County residents don’t want St. Louis County to merge with the City of St. Louis. However, what ideas do they have for improving St. Louis County? What would happen if Chesterfield could successfully leave St. Louis County? Can Brentwood, on its own, afford to fix its flooding problem along Manchester Road? Why is there a perception that the metro areas of Indianapolis and Nashville are “doing better” than St. Louis? Des St. Louis County have something comparable to Cortex?
Tom: Remember that the real issue here – in fact, the only issue – is debt. The City of St. Louis is $2 billion in debt, due to “excessive spending on non-performing public works,” according to the City Comptroller’s annual report. The financial institutions (Stifel, Wells Fargo) that coerced the city into this excessive debt, without voter approval, now fear the city will default and want to ensure themselves a bailout.
Somewhat ironically, they also are concerned because the city is reaching its state-mandated debt limit (10 percent of total assessed valuation), amid increasing demand among upper-income investors for the type of tax-free investment opportunity that municipal bonds offers.
Their solution: establish a new regional government that can both bailout the city’s debtholders and exploit the untapped borrowing potential of St. Louis County and its municipalities.
When the merger backers say, “economic growth,” all they really mean is increased public debt and an increased opportunity for them to put more public money in their pockets.
Actually, St. Louis and St. Louis County both have a potentially bright future. The new National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency complex promises to have the same effect in North St. Louis the Lambert Airport/Boeing had on North County or that Scott Air Force Base has had on the O’Fallon, Il area.
As the northernmost, inland, year-around-ice-free point in the new American Marine Highway intermodal freight system, the St. Louis area now has the potential to replace most or all the transportation industry that has been lost here over recent years. The new freight industry can already be seen in the Edwardsville and Collinsville areas and distribution complexes are already under development around St. Louis-Lambert Airport and in Fenton.
The secret will be negotiating down the massive debt that is scaring off business from St. Louis and continuing to administer St. Louis County in a responsible manner.
In fact, Indianapolis and Louisville are not perceived as more successful than St. Louis. Indianapolis is a disaster having slipped from the 18th largest SMSA to the 34th since implementation of its Unigov regional government. The Louisville Courier-Journal reports legislation has been introduced to dissolve or weaken Louisville’s Metro regional government, as people are again seeking to establish their own municipalities and growth outside Louisville far exceeds growth within the Metro.
Regarding your other specific points:
–St. Louis County’s present private-sector businesses, such as Centene, and the above-mention new transportation industry will likely provide far more jobs and economic opportunity than Cortex. However, you raise a good point. The reason St. Louis County does not have more Cortex-type activity is that, according to my young Washington U-employed neighbors, the university is strongly encouraging students, employees and university-related business to locate in the Cortex area.
Clayton, Richmond Heights and the other mid-county municipalities around Washington U. clearly are not enjoying the same growth in technology businesses that municipalities around research universities in the Bay Area, Texas, North Carolina or Alabama have enjoyed. Think what it could mean for vacancy rates in Clayton or the vacant buildings along Big Bend, if Wash U. weren’t steering people elsewhere.
–Depending on the exact location, storm water problems of the type you mention will either fall under the jurisdiction of an existing regional entity – the Metropolitan Sewer District – or could be addressed by the City of Brentwood with the assistance of federal grants. The city is probably already looking into it.
–Chesterfield stands a very good chance of entering St. Charles County successfully. Moreover, we are probably going to see a number of similar secession movements, some already underway, in central or south county.
Hope some of this is helpful. Thanks for your interest.
Bob,
Thanks very much for your very insightful feedback.
I am not sure that we don’t already have some sort of a merger in some areas already. It seems at least in the fire and police departments there is some cooperation but I may be wrong. I seem to hear if there is a fire or a police action that the city/county line can be crossed if help is needed. How that gets handled I am not sure. Does Maplewood pay another city if one of it’s fire trucks shows up to help put out a fire. If there was a police action that a request was put out for assistance and another city comes to help is there an exchange of money for that police department’s assistance? Or is it just a verbal “we helped you so you owe us if we need help”. I think most emergency calls go to a central phone center. Some of the libraries have shared book loaning.
It might help me to study the issue a bit more to see if there are really some pros and cons. I have lived here for nearly 40 years and it seems this has been talked about almost since I moved here. No city wants to give up it’s identity and government but surely we could think about going from something like 90 “cities” to maybe more like 20 or so. Some of the cities of 2000 already contract all or at least most of their services from someone else so why not let them join in with someone else and be a city of 10,000 or more.
“No city wants to give up it’s identity and government” I certainly think this is part of it, but I grew up in the city and it is full of neighborhood associations, business districts, etc. that provide that but remain part of the city as a whole, sharing services & departments. Examples include the better known ones such as The Hill, The Grove, CWE, but also ones like College Hill, JeffVanderLou, & Clifton Heights (my “hometown”.
The current merger initiative is being driven solely by a two-fold concern within the investment community.
–The City of St. Louis has $2 billion in long-term debt and its bond holders, led by Stifel Financial, are concerned the city will default; as did Detroit. They would like to effectively arrange a bailout through merger with St. Louis County.
–Demand for tax-free investment opportunities among upper income investors is rapidly increasing. Because the City of St. Louis – in addition to being over-extended and in danger of default — is approaching its state-mandated borrowing limit (10 percent of total assessed valuation), it cannot offer additional inventory for investors.
Financial houses, such as Stifel and Wells-Fargo, now hope to meet growing demand for tax-free bonds by merging St. Louis and St. Louis County; effectively allowing them to exploit the relatively untapped borrowing potential of the county and its municipalities (probably around $2.4 billion).
While area residents generally do not have all the exact financial data, it has long been widely understood that the City of St. Louis is mismanaged. Merger or other financial interaction between the city and county is therefore extremely unpopular.
Virtually any accountant will explain that an entity with a $2 billion debt is not a suitable candidate for merger.
The normal methodologies for dealing with such debt are: renegotiation (already underway for some of the city’s debt), write-off, or bankruptcy.
Bondholders generally are opposed to those common options because they will generally take a loss.
Knowing bailouts are extremely unpopular, the St. Louis bondholders have retained a political consultancy to make their proposed merger/bailout seem more palatable. The consultancy over the past five years has floated – and generally then promptly abandoned – a dozen merger rationalizations; all of which were quickly disproven.
For example; studies by the UMSL Public Policy Research Center (https://pprc.umsl.edu) show municipal consolidation holds little potential for improved cost efficiency. Follow-up studies on the Indianapolis Unigov merger – on which the prosed St. Louis merger is modeled – confirm few cost efficiency improvements – and a marked decline in economic development.
St. Louis area municipalities long ago implemented purchasing co-ops, mutual aid agreements and most of the other arrangements that have been demonstrated effectively across the county for cutting costs or improving municipal services. (Mutual aid agreements authorize the type of interaction among police and fire departments, that you mention. To my knowledge, there is no reimbursement among municipalities.)
In fact, St. Louis has long been a leader in regional government. The Bi-State Development Agency was one of the first Congressionally chartered interstate development compacts in the nation. The East-West Gateway Council of Government was one of the first federally recognized regional planning authorities. The St. Louis Zoo Museum District was the first of its type anywhere.
For that reason, St. Louisan have long understood the potential shortfalls, as well as benefits of such entities. Bi-State, for example, is well-known for its well-documented financial and other problems. In the City of St. Louis, crime and community relations problems have only increased since the police department was consolidated into “superstations.”
The real value in small municipalities and service districts is not identity; but rather that they provide, what Al Gore used to call, a “lock box” around tax funds to ensure they are used for the designated purposes.
Metro East has the highest pre-capita number of government subdivisions because in the nation because (as most people over there will readily acknowledge), corruption has been longstanding and documented. Dividing public funds into small packages helps ensure that specific public services (fire, sewer, etc.) will remain intact and specific incidents of corruption will be relegated to a limited area.
In summary: government consolidation holds little potential benefit and enormous potential for fiscal disaster.
As a concerned citizen, I would urge you to help encourage a sensible course of fiscal remediation for the City of St. Louis – perhaps through state intervention – and then implementation of safeguards to prevent excessive debt in the future.
Sorry about the long-winded response. Hope some of this is helpful.
Two things Bob- 1 – That was beautiful. Should be required reading for everyone in the StL metro. 2 – KA-POW! Nice job.
I agree with Rick. This is a great write-up. Thanks for taking the time to explain it. I knew the desire for the merger all boiled down to money and power. I just didn’t quite know how.
Thank you
Mark,
Maplewood is part of a fire protection district with Richmond Heights and Brentwood. The command structure is integrated, and they have established protocols for how the individual departments respond to calls and share equipment. The accounting part is well established with contractual arrangements. It’s actually a powerful testament to how local government can work efficiently and effectively when it is managed by highly qualified people who care about the citizens they serve.
No. That’s not correct. They are each fire departments. They do not share command structure. Although the taxpayers of RH provide battalion chief incident supervision to neighboring departments when RHFD is dispatched. There’s an amazing amount of inefficiency and waste in emergency services thanks to politicians who care more about their city borders then public safety.
Correct, they are each distinct fire departments, but they have arrangements to respond to calls together when it is warranted, and they do share a central dispatch. I overstated the integration of the command structure, but I’m pretty sure that the chiefs cover for each other on calls to ensure that a chief is always around. I believe that full integration of the departments was considered, but it fell apart for some reason. Politics, perhaps.
Personally, I am a longtime merger opponent and have many of the same reservations that Rick expresses. The post was intended to be an objective report; informing 40South readers on an important issue, without taking a position.
Agreed.
I’m thinking that I’m going to fall in the “do nothing” column should we see that Board of Freeholders brought into session. I’m afraid I don’t trust politicians to keep the interests of the average citizen in mind during the wheeling and dealing that is intrinsic to this kind of proposal. I pay pretty decent money to live in Brentwood, just to get the small-town type feel, which includes access to government and various city departments and services. I don’t want to lose those things while my money goes to subsidize entities which have done a poor job of managing their finances. And I believe that’s what this is all about, redistributing our taxes. It’s the best way to buy votes, and increases the opportunities for graft while putting the people in charge out of reach. Try getting Stenger on the phone some time. Let me know how that works out for you. I’m not signing any ballot petitions.
“And I believe that’s what this is all about, redistributing our taxes.” Nice job Sherlock. Tough nut to crack, that one. Have you ever thought that the problems the city has are due to a shallow tax base caused by having higher income communities in the country hoard tax income to have duplicate entities in a hundred little fiefdoms? Maybe if we redistributed things like we should, the whole metro would benefit. Or should we just build a wall around the county to keep everyone happy and insulated for good?
Hi Javier! Well, no. I’ve always thought that the problems in the city were caused by the combination of concentrated low income households and the time honored custom of electing corrupt and incompetent leadership. I don’t want to kick in to finance the corruption. Would a merger, and the inflow of county money cure those problems? Would the voting population of the city sweep out the crooks and start electing upstanding leaders? Why do I get the feeling that by “the whole metro would benefit”, you mean “Javier would benefit”? How about you keep your hands out of our pockets, and try making a personal difference? Not enough payback for all of Brentwood’s sins in that for you? And the old Soviet word “hoarding”? Really? Who divorced who in the city/county relationship?
Do you honestly believe your local and county officials are not corrupt and incompetent as well? Let’s remove redundant and unnecessary incompetence.
No, they’re corrupt. Not as baldfaced corrupt as in StL., but yes, plenty to go around. Did you miss the statement from Stenger & Krewson this week where they promised no one would lose their govt. job after the merger? Doesn’t sound like removing redundant & unnecessary incompetence. Sounds like more of the same, only with an un-elected Stenger on the throne for 6 years. Just another layer or two of corruption & incompetence to pay for.
Comments are closed.