Readers Optimistic We Can Elect More Independent Candidates
Yesterday Scott Ogilvie was sworn in as alderman in St. Louis’ 24th ward. Â Ogilvie is a political independent, whereas the 27 other aldermen are Democrats. Republican Fred Heitert was defeated by Democrat Larry Arnowitz earlier this month.
Q:Â Can we elect more Independent candidates like Scott Ogilvie to the St. Louis Board of Aldermen?
- Yes, bright young candidates free of the local Democratic machine can be elected again 66 [61.68%]
- Maybe, but Tom Bauer winning the Democratic primary helped Ogilvie win 21 [19.63%]
- No, won’t happen again for years 5 [4.67%]
- Unsure/no opinion 5 [4.67%]
- I hope not. We need to stick to electing democrats. 5 [4.67%]
- Other answer… 5Â [4.67%]
Clearly most who voted were optimistic as a result of Ogilvie being elected. Â The combination of a fresh face, hard work and Bauer winning the March primary got Ogilvie elected. Â Ogilvie could have beaten Waterhouse, but it would have been very close. Interesting that so few think we should stick with Democrats.
The five other answers were:
- Democrats are sooo last century!
- I hope so.
- who cares
- Yes, but most likely only in a few South City wards and the central wards.
- Too many wards in the city…
Hopefully we will have more Independent candidates in 2013 — start planning now!
– Steve Patterson
I’m actually less concerned with labels and affiliations (if any) and much more interested in leadership and effectiveness. Honorary street names, no, alley recycling, yes. Artistic fire hydrants, no, economic development, yes. One current alderman who seems to be doing a great job is Antonio French, yet he’s one of those “Democrats”.
I’m actually less concerned with labels and affiliations (if any) and much more interested in leadership and effectiveness. Honorary street names, no, alley recycling, yes. Artistic fire hydrants, no, economic development, yes. One current alderman who seems to be doing a great job is Antonio French, yet he’s one of those “Democrats”.
Exactlly. I think we need to be very careful about assuming that someone who does not claim a party affiliation is “independent.” We need to step up and take responsibility ourselves for proper governance rather than waiting for someone else to accept the responsibility and decide whether or not they are good enough for us.
And, I, too, would hate to lose Antonio French because he doesn’t run as an independent. And I think he’s going to good no matter how often he runs and gets elected.
Exactlly. I think we need to be very careful about assuming that someone who does not claim a party affiliation is “independent.” We need to step up and take responsibility ourselves for proper governance rather than waiting for someone else to accept the responsibility and decide whether or not they are good enough for us.
And, I, too, would hate to lose Antonio French because he doesn’t run as an independent. And I think he’s going to good no matter how often he runs and gets elected.
Obviously bright minds can come from anywhere and all politicans should be held accountable…But let’s not kid ourselves about the pressures party politics can put on an alderman…An elected independent has a clear mandate from the voters to challenge some of the assumptions of the long incumbant ruling party, will be viewed by the BOA as a possible source of ideas outside of the ‘partythink,’ and is freer to stand strongly outside of ideals and proposals of the ruling party…It does seem to me that if the goal is reorienting City Hall away from business as usual, a fair number of outsiders and independents are called for…
Obviously bright minds can come from anywhere and all politicans should be held accountable…But let’s not kid ourselves about the pressures party politics can put on an alderman…An elected independent has a clear mandate from the voters to challenge some of the assumptions of the long incumbant ruling party, will be viewed by the BOA as a possible source of ideas outside of the ‘partythink,’ and is freer to stand strongly outside of ideals and proposals of the ruling party…It does seem to me that if the goal is reorienting City Hall away from business as usual, a fair number of outsiders and independents are called for…
Labels and affiliations do not matter, I agree with JZ 100%, what really matters is actions on the ground. By those standards all of the aldermen except those elected in the recent past, including the mayor, are clueless candidates for green recycling. They should all be sent packing.
The failure to supply leadership concerning Paul Mckee and his Northside proposals are absolutely disgraceful. I hate to keep bringing this up, but when are we going to address the damn problems this nation faces? When, in another 50 years?
Who cares about the labels? it’s the ideas that matter. The McKee project is a perfect reflection of the lack of leadership and responsible action in this city. The buck stops at the Board of Aldermen and the Mayor.
Labels and affiliations do not matter, I agree with JZ 100%, what really matters is actions on the ground. By those standards all of the aldermen except those elected in the recent past, including the mayor, are clueless candidates for green recycling. They should all be sent packing.
The failure to supply leadership concerning Paul Mckee and his Northside proposals are absolutely disgraceful. I hate to keep bringing this up, but when are we going to address the damn problems this nation faces? When, in another 50 years?
Who cares about the labels? it’s the ideas that matter. The McKee project is a perfect reflection of the lack of leadership and responsible action in this city. The buck stops at the Board of Aldermen and the Mayor.
My belief is that those who are outside the party hierarchy are less likely to just go with the status quo.
I disagree. In a heavily-Democratic, urban area, it’s no surprise that most of our aldermen are Democrats, no different than most elected officials in St. Charles are Republicans. The bigger issue is our tradition of aldermanic courtesy, where every alderman seems to treat their ward as a personal fiefdom, and all the other aldermen pretty much let them do as they please. The evil party may play a big role in selecting the candidates, but I see little evidenece of an organized party providing any sort of unified vision for the city. It will be interesting to see how (more?) effective this new independent will be compared to previous ad hoc independent, Fred Heitert, the sole Republican for two decades.
Party hierarchy and the status quo matter little upon the face of idea bullets. In other words, in a true democracy ideas should matter.
If it is true, then party affiliation is irrelevant.
Too much of the discussion is about labels, and not enough about ideas. This is pretty well a description of any political ad I have seen on TV.
That does not make it right. My obvious concern that the McKee fiasco on the Northside represents a lost opportunity driving discussions about sustainability, oil, urban areas, walkability and transit in today’s environment. The lack of discussion illustrates a failure of leadership, no matter what the label. (hopefully it can still change).
Will independent or green make a difference in policy? Only if their ideas are better, I have yet to see that, (or from the democrats or republicans either).
The proof is in results.
The Northside project should be a sign post to the future, not a repetition of the past.
It is here now, if this blogs can’t change the face of the Northside proposals, then the blogs themselves are probably worthless. Joining the already useless mainstream media (channels 5, 4, the Post and so on) with the equally useless political establishment (unless you are a well connected, money giving, influence buying capitalist).
So that self-sustaining camp lost in the mountains is looking pretty good to you right about now?
What is it exactly you are trying to say? Taking a wild guess at what I think or want to do does nothing to address the discussion.
I realize you put forth many ideas furthering the discussion. I tend to agree with some if not many of your premises. You also seem to be fairly dissatisfied with gov’t (as are the majority of Americans). It’s just that it often seems you seriously doubt the ability of our gov’t to EVER make policy decisions which conform to your ideas. I thought that could be pretty disheartening. Just the impression I get.
A new mayor and new members in the board of aldermen are not necessary if they are capable of evolving their thinking to address problems of today.
City Planning along with transit are major paths in solving concerns about energy, oil and even employment. (Transit supports small business and market style environments. The focus of the auto is on the support of large scale chains).
It is reasonable to expect a broad based and ongoing debate about strategic goals concerning any northside redevelopment, part of which involves of Paul McKee (who by the way is receiving millions of dollars in public subsidies).
If blogs and public discussion fail, then a complete change of leadership is warranted with the mayor and board of alderman. Actually some 50 years of decline should have already precipitated this change, but the system is so hidebound and immovable that it has not happened. St. Louis has a weak form of leadership type of government. They are all worried more about the next election than making a difference.
Government is the problem, but can also be the solution with radical realignment. Yes I am frustrated; I have children, a grandchild on the way,(and all the children). I hate what is going on in the country and region. I don’t how obvious the need for change has to be before there is a fair discussion in the press and with political types about new approaches.
I know people like to pretend everything is just fine. Well it’s not.The bits of Paul McKee suburban style plans are totally unacceptable. All of the damn public money invested, and all St. Louis is going to get a suburban piece of crap in which the media calls everything green.
Defining a comprehensive planning regiment is essential. What is ironic St. Louis just got a “sustainable” city grant from the feds. What is happening with that? Why not use it on the northside? Instead are the funds being drained by their friends to produce a corporate friendly plan?
So yea, it is about time to get rid of everyone in city hall.
What the hell. St. Louis needs a slew of new leaders. The failure of the Mayor and the Board of Alderman to act to address the needs of a 21st century St. Louis is stark.
Here is a detailed response I posted on nextSTL about a new green McKee plan. (Use the words green or recycle and everything will be okay) This comment is in response to a possible Wal Mart on the Northside and illustrates the how clueless the power structure in St. Louis really is.
It also makes clear why massive changes in the Board of Aldermen are needed.
There are countries that ban stores like Wal-Mart for a reason. A good synopsis is The Project on the City, volume 2 Guide to Shopping, Harvard Design School, (editor Rem Koolhaus among others), The article in titled Resistance to Retail in Europe. There are numerous variations of countries controlling stores like Wal-Mart. I will focus on Finland, whose law has “successfully limited large-scale developments.” The restrictions apply to commercial premises greater than 2000 sq meters.
The important point of the law is that the restriction applies except when the “site is designated for that purpose in town plan” The goal of course is to protect small business as well as transit usage and to weave larger retail into broader conceptions of transit, economic activity and city livability.
This is the basic failure of the McKee plan. While the general green goals set forth above are fine and dandy the real discussion needs to start with transit and what is to be accomplished in any new northside development. This will help generate the desire for an urban Wal-Mart over a suburban Wal-Mart and answer many other questions about the trajectory of future development.
A big box store is car central, where large purchases equal baskets and baskets of goodies that need to be hauled. A transit/walking orientated city means smaller retail shops available along routes, picking up needs on a more frequent basis and carrying on transit, with larger retail outlets in appropriate locations in the city plan. This is different than the anything goes attitude, undermining transit development, small business and neighborhoods.
The elephant in the room is oil and the many maladies that accompany oil. Transportation and buildings represent a significant percentage of oil usage in America.
I don’t understand how this can be ignored at this juncture in history, or how another suburban style development can be proposed without an understanding of the ramifications to the overall health of the city.
The real failure is in city government, who should be guiding the process to meet the interests of citizens now and in the future. Instead it is left as a random variable waiting for McKee to come up with his plan. It is poor leadership through and through.
The mainstream media is also a big part of this failure. Critical thinking is nonexistent.
St Louis has a chance to address serious and real problems that have been made clear over and over as gas prices continue to rise once again. The debate about this should be all over the press because of its importance to the future of St. Louis, yet there is nothing but silence.
What the hell. St. Louis needs a slew of new leaders. The failure of the Mayor and the Board of Alderman to act to address the needs of a 21st century St. Louis is stark.
Here is a detailed response I posted on nextSTL about a new green McKee plan. (Use the words green or recycle and everything will be okay) This comment is in response to a possible Wal Mart on the Northside and illustrates the how clueless the power structure in St. Louis really is.
It also makes clear why massive changes in the Board of Aldermen are needed.
There are countries that ban stores like Wal-Mart for a reason. A good synopsis is The Project on the City, volume 2 Guide to Shopping, Harvard Design School, (editor Rem Koolhaus among others), The article in titled Resistance to Retail in Europe. There are numerous variations of countries controlling stores like Wal-Mart. I will focus on Finland, whose law has “successfully limited large-scale developments.” The restrictions apply to commercial premises greater than 2000 sq meters.
The important point of the law is that the restriction applies except when the “site is designated for that purpose in town plan” The goal of course is to protect small business as well as transit usage and to weave larger retail into broader conceptions of transit, economic activity and city livability.
This is the basic failure of the McKee plan. While the general green goals set forth above are fine and dandy the real discussion needs to start with transit and what is to be accomplished in any new northside development. This will help generate the desire for an urban Wal-Mart over a suburban Wal-Mart and answer many other questions about the trajectory of future development.
A big box store is car central, where large purchases equal baskets and baskets of goodies that need to be hauled. A transit/walking orientated city means smaller retail shops available along routes, picking up needs on a more frequent basis and carrying on transit, with larger retail outlets in appropriate locations in the city plan. This is different than the anything goes attitude, undermining transit development, small business and neighborhoods.
The elephant in the room is oil and the many maladies that accompany oil. Transportation and buildings represent a significant percentage of oil usage in America.
I don’t understand how this can be ignored at this juncture in history, or how another suburban style development can be proposed without an understanding of the ramifications to the overall health of the city.
The real failure is in city government, who should be guiding the process to meet the interests of citizens now and in the future. Instead it is left as a random variable waiting for McKee to come up with his plan. It is poor leadership through and through.
The mainstream media is also a big part of this failure. Critical thinking is nonexistent.
St Louis has a chance to address serious and real problems that have been made clear over and over as gas prices continue to rise once again. The debate about this should be all over the press because of its importance to the future of St. Louis, yet there is nothing but silence.
My belief is that those who are outside the party hierarchy are less likely to just go with the status quo.
I disagree. In a heavily-Democratic, urban area, it’s no surprise that most of our aldermen are Democrats, no different than most elected officials in St. Charles are Republicans. The bigger issue is our tradition of aldermanic courtesy, where every alderman seems to treat their ward as a personal fiefdom, and all the other aldermen pretty much let them do as they please. The evil party may play a big role in selecting the candidates, but I see little evidenece of an organized party providing any sort of unified vision for the city. It will be interesting to see how (more?) effective this new independent will be compared to previous ad hoc independent, Fred Heitert, the sole Republican for two decades.
Party hierarchy and the status quo matter little upon the face of idea bullets. In other words, in a true democracy ideas should matter.
If it is true, then party affiliation is irrelevant.
Too much of the discussion is about labels, and not enough about ideas. This is pretty well a description of any political ad I have seen on TV.
That does not make it right. My obvious concern that the McKee fiasco on the Northside represents a lost opportunity driving discussions about sustainability, oil, urban areas, walkability and transit in today’s environment. The lack of discussion illustrates a failure of leadership, no matter what the label. (hopefully it can still change).
Will independent or green make a difference in policy? Only if their ideas are better, I have yet to see that, (or from the democrats or republicans either).
The proof is in results.
The Northside project should be a sign post to the future, not a repetition of the past.
It is here now, if this blogs can’t change the face of the Northside proposals, then the blogs themselves are probably worthless. Joining the already useless mainstream media (channels 5, 4, the Post and so on) with the equally useless political establishment (unless you are a well connected, money giving, influence buying capitalist).
So that self-sustaining camp lost in the mountains is looking pretty good to you right about now?
What is it exactly you are trying to say? Taking a wild guess at what I think or want to do does nothing to address the discussion.
I realize you put forth many ideas furthering the discussion. I tend to agree with some if not many of your premises. You also seem to be fairly dissatisfied with gov’t (as are the majority of Americans). It’s just that it often seems you seriously doubt the ability of our gov’t to EVER make policy decisions which conform to your ideas. I thought that could be pretty disheartening. Just the impression I get.
A new mayor and new members in the board of aldermen are not necessary if they are capable of evolving their thinking to address problems of today.
City Planning along with transit are major paths in solving concerns about energy, oil and even employment. (Transit supports small business and market style environments. The focus of the auto is on the support of large scale chains).
It is reasonable to expect a broad based and ongoing debate about strategic goals concerning any northside redevelopment, part of which involves of Paul McKee (who by the way is receiving millions of dollars in public subsidies).
If blogs and public discussion fail, then a complete change of leadership is warranted with the mayor and board of alderman. Actually some 50 years of decline should have already precipitated this change, but the system is so hidebound and immovable that it has not happened. St. Louis has a weak form of leadership type of government. They are all worried more about the next election than making a difference.
Government is the problem, but can also be the solution with radical realignment. Yes I am frustrated; I have children, a grandchild on the way,(and all the children). I hate what is going on in the country and region. I don’t how obvious the need for change has to be before there is a fair discussion in the press and with political types about new approaches.
I know people like to pretend everything is just fine. Well it’s not.The bits of Paul McKee suburban style plans are totally unacceptable. All of the damn public money invested, and all St. Louis is going to get a suburban piece of crap in which the media calls everything green.
Defining a comprehensive planning regiment is essential. What is ironic St. Louis just got a “sustainable” city grant from the feds. What is happening with that? Why not use it on the northside? Instead are the funds being drained by their friends to produce a corporate friendly plan?
So yea, it is about time to get rid of everyone in city hall.