Better Together St. Louis Raises My Suspicions

I’m generally in favor of reducing the number of government entities in the St. Louis region. The 2011 Where We Stand report (p88) sums up the numbers:

We rely on local government for a wide array of services including public education, health and safety, infrastructure, environmental protection and sanitation, public housing, and arts and cultural support.

• The St. Louis region continues to be ranked in the top three for overall number of governmental units, as well as for the ratio of governments to population.

Depending on perspective, the region’s local government structure can be seen as the 3rd most fragmented or the 3rd most accessible to its citizens and businesses.

• With 884 individual units of government,

St. Louis ranks 3rd only to Pittsburgh and Denver among our peer regions in ratio of local governments to citizens.

For the 35 peer regions, the average number of governmental units has decreased from 399 in 2002 to 379 in 2007.

• Of the 35 regions, 20 have fewer governmental units in 2007 than they had in 2002.

In the St. Louis region, the number of units of local government continues to increase.

• Less than half of local government units in the St. Louis region are general-purpose governments, such as counties, municipalities, and townships.

• In 2007, the St. Louis region had 9.8 municipalities per 100,000 population, up from 8.9 municipalities per 100,000 in 2002.

A majority of area local governments have been established for specific functions, including school districts, special taxing districts, or other special district governments.

• Almost all of these special district governments perform a single task, such as drainage and flood control, soil and water conservation, fire protection, water supply, or housing and community development.

• The St. Louis region’s ratio of school districts per population ranked 2nd in 2007 with 4.8 per 100,000 population; slightly lower than the 5.0 per 100,000 reported in 2002.

I’m of the belief that more units of government isn’t necessarily a good or bad thing, just as fewer isn’t necessarily a good or bad thing. I do know the St. Louis region

• Contains roughly 2.8 million people
• Less than half (46%), 1.3 million, live in St. Louis City & County
• The job market remains sluggish
• Tax incentives have been ineffective at economic development.
• 137 years since St. Louis City removed itself from St. Louis County, residents of both entities have very strong, mostly negative, feelings about the other. Those in the rest of the region hold similar views about one or both.

With this in mind you might think I’d be a cheerleader for the new Better Together Saint Louis effort.

Sponsored by the Missouri Council for a Better Economy, Better Together is a grassroots project born in response to growing public interest in addressing the fragmented nature of local government throughout St. Louis City and County, which dates back to 1876, when St. Louis City broke away from St. Louis County.

The resulting absence of a cohesive governmental structure left a void and many smaller governments formed to fill it. This is why the 1.3 million people who call St. Louis home are served by 116 local governments, which include St. Louis City and County, as well as 91 municipalities and 23 fire districts. The costs associated with funding all 116 governments (excluding airport and water service fees) has reached a staggering $2 billion per year. To-date, there has been no comprehensive single study that has looked across the City and County to determine whether the region could improve both service and cost by streamlining and eliminating redundancies and better serve the people of St. Louis.

Better Together is neither putting forth nor advocating for a specific plan to such end, but rather seeks to act as a facilitator, a resource for information and tools, and a catalyst to spark discussion. Accordingly, we will drive an inclusive, transparent process of developing and assembling valuable information other organizations can use to craft their own plans for what the future of the region should look like, as well as judge plans put forth by others.

I remain a skeptic for a variety of reasons:

• As I explained earlier, the region is much larger and more complex than just St. Louis City & County.
• The Missouri Council for a Better Economy was started by Rex Sinquefield, a billionaire seeking to alter tax policy in his favor.
• “Sponsored by” and “grassroots” in the same sentence! Really, how exactly does that work? Sounds like this might be astroturfing.
• Just collecting data for the community to decide what to do with it, but the name and MCBE clearly shows reunification as the intent.  Plus, data from the many school districts isn’t being collected because they don’t want to get “bogged down.”  If the mission is to collect data on how tax money is being spent it makes sense to look at it all — what’s the hurry?

Let’s dig a bit deeper into the above reasons I listed.

Region:

Forty-six percent of the region’s population isn’t the region. Granted, this 46% live in the city or county that carry the region’s name. Still, I think something well over 50% is required to discuss a topic as regional in nature. Better together is clearly focused on the City of St. Louis and St. Louis County only, not the region.

MCBE:

From their “About Us” as of 8:30am yesterday “The studies were funded by MCBE, whose sole donor until now has been Rex Sinquefield, a retired investment fund executive and philanthropist.” Oh but they told me he hasn’t given any money in a year. Rex is a fan of chess and I can see a strategy playing out of him giving enough money to fund MCBE for a couple of years  — that way it can be paid he’s the sole donor from the past, but not now. Question for MCBE, how many donors since the last donation from Rex?

Grassroots:

Calling yourself grassroots doesn’t mean you’re actually a grassroots movement. The Better Together STL materials indicate it’s a project of MCBE, not a separate organization. I didn’t find any such organization listed with the Secretary of State. The website  does list a board which is comprised of the powerful & elite of local politics and business. Also on this “board” — Rex’s Chief of Staff. Those in attendance at the kickoff represent more of the same — nothing remotely grassroots about it.

Data:

Several issues here. The speakers all said they’re just collecting data so we know what we spend and where — sounds reasonable. But everywhere you look at Better Together and MCBE the final goal is clear — unification of some sorts. And schools are a big part of where our tax money is spent and school districts are governmental entities just like fire protection districts, we should look at education too if the goal is an honest self evaluation.

While I support reducing the number of units of government my goal isn’t to provide the same services for less money, as was stated several times. My goal would be to provide more services distributed more evenly for the same money.

Unfortunately, I see Better Together  & MCBE as a backdoor to Rex’s radical tax policies — no state income taxes, no city earnings taxes, higher property & sales taxes.  The wealthy’s fantasy to get out of paying their share, they can easily buy any services the community can’t afford to provide.   Some will claim this has bipartisan support, but our Democrats are often that in name only, they’re as fiscally conservative policy-wise as far-right Republicans.  I keep hoping a local version of Bernie Sanders will appear. I want to believe  this is an altruistic effort, but I’m not gullible.

I’d like to see an actual grassroots effort look at our region with an open mind — perhaps even concluding nothing should change with respect to the relationship between the city & county.

— Steve Patterson

Poll: How should Missouri make up the shortage in funding for roads & highways? (pick 2)

The Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) says it needs more money than it receives:

MoDOT has been warning for years that its annual highway construction budget would decline significantly as bond payments for those projects came due. That drop-off has now hit: The annual construction budget has fallen from $1.2 billion to less than $700 million, and it’s projected to drop to $425 million by 2019.

Missouri’s highway system has long depended on fuel taxes. But the report, required by federal law, said people drive less, and vehicles are more fuel-efficient. Meanwhile, inflation is increasing the cost of projects, the report noted. The price of asphalt, concrete and steel are double and triple what they were 20 years ago, when fuel taxes were last raised, the report said. (Columbia Daily Tribune)

One idea from earlier this year, a sales tax, is back in the news:

A proposal to raise a statewide one-cent sales tax to fund transportation projects could be headed to a Missouri ballot in 2014, if supporters of a new initiative petition are able to gather enough citizen support to put it there. (Kansas City Business Journal)

Other revenue options include tolls, increased licensing fees, raising the state fuel tax, and even closing roads/bridges rather than maintain/replace them. For the poll this week I’d like you to pick your top two options. Two because one alone might not be sufficient enough, the poll is at the top of the right sidebar.

 — Steve Patterson

Poll: Should Missouri Allow Same-Sex Couples To Marry Before Being Required By The Courts?

Missouri and same-sex marriage made the national news last week:

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon (D) said Thursday that he would sign an executive order to allow gay and lesbian couples who were legally married in other states to file joint tax returns with the state Department of Revenue, a move likely to prompt a legislative reaction from the Republican-dominated legislature.

Nixon told reporters Thursday that because the couples will be able to file joint returns with the Internal Revenue Service, the Missouri Department of Revenue should accept those returns as well. (Washington Post)

Missouri requires couples to file in Missouri as they do their federal return(s).  Those who file individual federal returns must file individual state returns with Missouri, those who file a joint federal return must also do so in Missouri. This worked until the IRS said legally married same-sex couples can file together regardless of their state of residence.

This as two more states recently joined the list recognizing same-sex marriages:

As Hawaii and Illinois join the list of states approving same-sex marriage, the United States crosses a big mark on the issue: More than 1 in 3 Americans will live where same-sex marriage is legal.

It’s a dramatic shift in a short period of time — one not seen on other social issues.

Hawaii’s Legislature passed the measure Tuesday. Gov. Neil Abercrombie signed it into law Wednesday morning. It will go into effect December 2.

Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn plans to sign legislation for his state November 20. It will take effect June 1. (CNN)

With Hawaii and Illinois the total number of states recognizing same0-sex marriage is 16, plus the District of Columbia. Here’s the list in order of effective date, showing when effective and how it happened:

1. Massachusetts/May 2004/Courts
2. California/June 2008-November 2008, June 2013/Courts, Prop 8, SCOTUS
3. Connecticut/November 2008/Courts & legislature
4. District of Columbia/March 2009/City Council
5. Iowa/April 2009/Courts
6. Vermont/September 2009/Legislature (overrode veto)
7. New Hampshire/January 2010/Legislature
8. New York/July 2011/Legislature
9. Washington/December 2012/Legislature & voters
10. Maine/December 2012/Voters
11. Maryland/January 2013/Legislature & voters
12. Delaware/July 2013/Legislature
13. Rhode Island/August 2013/Legislature
14. Minnesota/August 2013/Legislature
15. New Jersey/October 2013/Courts
16. Hawaii/December 2013/Legislature
17. Illinois/June 2014/Legislature

The above list is from information from Wikipedia.

More than half are based on legislative action, not the courts. This list accounts for 16/50 states, what about the other 34?

Here’s a list of states that have passed constitutional bans:

1. Alaska 1998
2. Hawaii 1998 (changed in 2013)
3. Nebraska 2000
4. Nevada 2002
5. Arkansas 2004
6. Georgia 2004
7. Kentucky 2004
8. Louisiana 2004
9. Michigan 2004
10. Mississippi 2004
11. Missouri 2004
12. Montana 2004
13. North Dakota 2004
14. Ohio 2004
15. Oklahoma 2004
16. Oregon 2004
17. Utah 2004
18. Kansas 2005
19. Texas 2005
20. Alabama 2006
21. Colorado 2006
22. Idaho 2006
23. South Carolina 2006
24. South Dakota 2006
25. Tennessee 2006
26. Virginia 2006
27. Wisconsin 2006
28. Arizona 2008 (a 2006 ban failed to pass)
29. California 2008 (ruled unconstitutional in 2013)
30. Florida 2008
31. North Carolina 2012

So 29 states (31 less Hawaii & California), including Missouri, have constitutional bans against same-sex marriage by defining marriage between a man and a woman. Thirteen of these states passed their ban in 2004, the year same-sex marriages began in Massachusetts. Five states don’t recognize same-sex marriage, but also don’t have a constitutional ban. These rely on state law to make marriage between a man and a woman.

By the time the 2016 election I think we’ll see a different landscape from today. The poll question this week wants your take on Missouri, should we allow same-sex couples to marry before being required by the courts to do so? The poll is in the right sidebar until next Sunday morning.

— Steve Patterson

Readers: Ban Pet Stores From Selling Puppy Mill Dogs

Readers that voted in the unscientific poll last week made it clear they’d support a ban on puppy mill dogs:

Q: Would you support a municipal/county ban on pet stores selling dogs from puppy mills?

1. Yes 61 [78.21%]
2. No 9 [11.54%]
3. Unsure/no opinion 6 [7.69%]
4. Possibly 2 [2.56%]

Such bans aren’t new:

Thirty-one cities have passed ordinances that ban pet stores from selling animals that come from commercial breeders. They are only allowed to offer rescued animals from shelters. (KMOV)

Maybe an alderman will introduce bill to ban pets stores in St. Louis from selling puppy mill dogs.

— Steve Patterson

A June 2014 Wedding

Monday night on KDHX I announced that my boyfriend and I got engaged last month. We didn’t plan to go to any of the 14 states, or Washington D.C., to get married. We wanted to get married in Missouri (where we live) or Illinois (his state of residence until this past February). We knew that meant a possible long engagement but we also knew there had been talk of the Illinois General Assembly approving a same-sex marriage bill most of this year. As late as a week or two ago it didn’t look like a vote would happen this year but 2014 looked promising.

Then suddenly, Tuesday morning, we hear the vote will happen. By the end of the day both the chambers passed the bill, sending it to the governor! To pass the measure the sponsor removed the paragraph making the law effective in 30 days. The law becomes effective on June 1, 2014.

Gov. Pat Quinn (D) said in a statement Tuesday that he would sign the bill into law, although he did not specify a date. The House, which had adjourned in May without passing a Senate bill legalizing same-sex marriage, approved the measure Tuesday by a vote of 61 to 54.

“Today the Illinois House put our state on the right side of history,” said Quinn, who campaigned for the measure, which is scheduled to take effect in June. (Washington Post)

So Tuesday night we set a date in June and started a wedding website. Yesterday I began the process of confirming the location. Today we’re going to city hall to register as Domestic Partners.

When I came out 30 years ago I didn’t think marriage would ever be an option…

— Steve Patterson