Reducing The Number Of Aldermen
Many have long thought 28 members of the St. Louis Board of Aldermen is excessive for a population of 350,000. Across the river in Granite City IL they will have the size of their city council go from 14 members to 10 in April. The numbers of wards will go from 7 to 5, each ward has two representatives.
In the 2011 election, all 10 seats will be up for election for either two- or four-year terms.(source)
The two & four year terms will allow for staggered 4-year terms going forward. Their thinking was fewer residents so you need fewer elected representatives. If only we’d get wind of such logic on this side of the river!
Here is a list of past decades with the number of residents per St. Louis alderman in parenthesis.
- 2000 (12,435)
- 1990 (14,167)
- 1980 (16,171)
- 1970 (22,223)
- 1960 (26,787)
- 1950 (30,600)
- 1940 (29,145)
- 1930 (29,356)
Were the aldermen of decades past so much more competent that they could represent more than twice as many residents as our current aldermen? Granted, they didn’t need to respond to constituent emails. Maybe, just maybe, the bureaucracy was such that citizens went there first rather than ring their aldermen? As our population declined the aldermen changed the system so they were thought to be indispensable?
Ald Fred Heitert was first sworn into office in 1979. After the 1980 census each alderman represented just over 16,000 persons. If we were to use this number, from the first year of a current alderman, we could go from 28 to 22 (based on 350,000 residents). 1970 was in my lifetime, if we use the 22,223 per alderman figure we would be at 16. Based on the 1950 peak we’d have only 11.
I have no clue what the magic number should be. Perhaps we should have two aldermen per ward such as Granite City does? It is time to reexamine how our city government is structured. If little Granite City IL can do it, why can’t we?
– Steve Patterson
I hate the idea of less representation – having less alderman and less wards. one Alderman per 12,000 residents seems to insure residents are being heard. This said – how effective are the Alderman? What does it cost to support an Alderman and their ward?
i have had only positive experiences with about a half dozen Alderman over the years – unlike dealing with property owners / city real estate brokers / Mark Twain owner – Amos Harris who is costing the city way more in wasted public money.
In the 1930s with so many more people and fewer means of communications 28 was probably necessary. Times have changed drastically. We need a legislative body moving the city forward, not personally handling every single issue in their 1/28th of the city.
Steve,
How does this issue impact the real challenges facing STL? We could change the number of aldermen, but does that get us more jobs, better educational outcomes, or fewer vacant buildings?
Fewer aldermen would give the board a broader view than they've had as we've lost half a million people.
Alderman are regular people like you and me. How does having fewer of them change their view? They work on the issues that are important to them and their wards. Each ward is different as is each alderman. The challenges the city faces are complicated. Making larger wards doesn't make fixing them any easier. You mention that Alderman Heitert has been in office since the 70s. His ward is one of the most stable in St. Louis. He keeps getting re-elected. People in his ward want to preserve the status quo, which they see as good, so they keep Alderman Heitert in office. Other wards have higher turnover for various reasons. Big issues most often identified as challenges to the future of the city – such as local control of the police or the state of public education – are beyond the political reach of aldermen. St. Louis County has only something like 5 County Councilpersons. They have challenges too. Should the County Council have more members? I need a lot more information to be convinced that changing the number of aldermen will improve the city of St. Louis. Times are tough, so people like to blame politiicans. According to this thread, the amount of money saved by reducing the number of aldermen works out to less than $1 per city resident. Big whoop.
Detroit's solution for broad thinking was to shrink to 9 members and do away with the ward system so they are all elected city wide.
Lets make sure we don't do that cuz its not working.
I used to think that the more alderman we had, the less things got done. Do you have any stats that prove that point?
Also, I am in total agreement with you that we don't need so many alderman. What would the policy or procedure be to minimize the number? I'm not sure how that works but I'd like to know.
Chicago has 50 aldermen. Are people clamoring to reduce the number of aldermen there? If St. Louis was humming along with great public schools, high property values, and a growing economy, would people be talking about reducing the number of aldermen?
Chicago has nearly 3 million residents – about 8 times the population of Saint Louis – yet only twice the the number of aldermen. Somehow Chicago still manages to “hum along”. This suggests that Saint Louis employs (and pays) more aldermen than necessary.
What exactly is the point you're trying to make?
I'm researching studies on government now. The Granite City example shows us how it could work. In 2013 the even numbered aldermen could be elected for two years rather than four. Then in 2015 the terms for all 28 would expire and we would elect the new number then.
Each Alderman makes $32,000 annually and also has a $4,200 expense fund. By reducing the number of Aldermen by 6, the City would save $217,200. That is not even taking into account the associated reduced staffing costs.
With the money saved in the first year, they could air condition the BoA chambers and then they can actually work 12 months a year like the rest of us.
I believe the city budget is in the $450,000,000 per year range. Financially, we are talking about a drop in the bucket. The move would be more symbolic than substantive. Whenever the issues of redistricting wards, reducing the number of aldermen or county offices come up, there is always concern of lessening representation among African American leadership in the city in a majority black city. Indeed, in 2000, when the 20th ward was moved out of North St. Louis, gerrymandered as it was, it was nonetheless mapped to be an “African American Opportunity Ward”. What happened? North St. Louis lost a ward and South St. Louis gained a ward. The map did withstand any legal challenges. In the first election after redistricting, the 20th ward changed from having a black alderman (Sharon Tyus) to a white alderman (Craig Schmid). There is a lot more to this issue than simply reducing the number of aldermen.
That amount may be a 'drop in the bucket', but I think it would be much better spent on something else. Anything from providing services for the homeless, lead abatement services, putting it towards pensions, road work, etc.
What if the magic representation number is 12k…. It looks like St. Louis… gulp… grew over the last decade for a change!
What if St. Louis had been spending $217K a year on 6 more alder-people and the hemorrhaging of population stopped at 420k instead of 350k.
We could be talking about extra tax revenue to put that air conditioned air in;)
Rick, you must be an alderman based on your comments. Redistrict and remove the aldermen! I don't care about these stupid black vs. white districts. Blacks need to learn to get along with the whites and vice versa.
Did you notice that Granite City’s ratio of council people to councilperson will go from 2,100 to 3,000? Did you notice that most St. Louis suburbs have a ratio of 3,000 to 5,000 residents per councilperson or that every subdivision has a property owners association?
Have you though that one of the contributing factors to the depopulation of St. Louis city was to few Alderpeople to begin with? That not having effective representation in city government was the reason that people moved to smaller municipalities were they did have better access to government.
I know this is a revolutionary idea… This country was founded on it… LOL
City voters apparently want 28 Alderman. I thought Charter Reform was on the ballot in 2004 and city voters pretty much voted it down.
I'm one who would like to see less alderman, but I was in the minority back then and I probably still am
It looks like the City of STL will soon be represented by one fewer US Congressman (and that the one lost will be a democrat). Is anyone happy about that?
I am! These damn STL Democrats are never up to any good.
Yes.
Not to mention savings in salary. If the city is looking for ways to save money, I always believe it should start with the politicians' salaries
While I think 28 is too many, every city is unique in the way it operates. Having fewer with a broader view would likely be a good thing, but would also involve major cultural change, including both empowering city employees and moving away from the concept of alderman as the go-to person for any and all ward concerns.
Denver, with a similar population has half as many city council members (who are paid more than twice as much), but they tend to stay away from many of the mundane issues aldermen deal with here, delegating them to both city staff and more-empowered neighborhood organizations. Is it different? Yes. Is it better? It probably depends on one's perspective.
Realistically, there are bigger issues to tackle, many revolving around the budget, everything from the earnings tax to the pensions, that it really doesn't matter if we have 28 or not. What's really needed is strong leadership and a real commitment to solving real problems. That can be done with 28 and it can fail with 14 or 9 – it boils down to people, not numbers!
In Charlotte, growing population has resulted in 100,000 people per council district. And there's no effort to increase the number. Maybe that's because councilmembers have always been responsive to individual residents. So really, 25,000 per ward shouldn't be a problem.