Tag: ST. Louis

Demonstration of Governance, Political, and Economic Functional Impact Using the Regional Arts Commission

Posted on by Leave a comment

Introduction

Publicly supported organizations exist at the intersection of governance, politics, and economics. Whether created by voter mandate or sustained through dedicated public funding, boards and commissions play a critical role in delivering quasi-governmental services that respond to community needs while maintaining political legitimacy and economic justification. Their effectiveness is measured not only by operational performance, but by their ability to demonstrate value—both tangible and intangible—to the regions they serve.

At the local and regional level, economic considerations shape nearly every policy and governance decision. Yet the underlying question is rarely limited to balance sheets alone. Instead, public investment invites a broader evaluation: Does this investment produce meaningful economic benefit, improve quality of life, and sustain public support? In this sense, economic impact becomes inseparable from political impact. Public organizations must continuously justify who benefits, how benefits are distributed, and why continued investment is warranted.

This analysis is structured around three interrelated functions that define the durability of public and quasi-public institutions:

  1. Governance, which ensures professional operations, accountability, and alignment with public purpose;
  2. Political function, which reflects constituency support, coalition strength, and legitimacy in public decision-making, which then meet the definition of who gets what and why; and
  3. Economic impact, which articulates how public investment circulates through and strengthens the regional economy.

Using these three functions as an analytical framework, this blog compares two economic impact studies produced by the Regional Arts Commission (RAC). Specifically, it examines the 2012 (Report IV) and 2025 (Report VI) studies—documents released during markedly different economic and political contexts. The 2012 report reflects conditions during the Great Recession, while the 2025 report emerges in a post-COVID recovery environment amid uncertainty surrounding federal arts funding.

By placing these two studies side by side, this comparison explores how RAC has used economic impact analysis as a strategic tool to communicate value, maintain political support, and reinforce its governance role within the St. Louis region. More broadly, it demonstrates how economic impact studies function not merely as technical reports, but as instruments that sustain public trust and institutional legitimacy across shifting economic and political landscapes.

Comparison of Regional Arts Commission of

St. Louis Economic Impact Studies

2012 and 2025

1. Overall Economic Impact: Strong Growth

Measure2012 Study (FY2010)2025 Study (FY2022)Change
Total Economic Activity$582.3M$868.7M▲ +$286.4M (~+49%)
GeographySt. Louis City & CountyGreater St. Louis AreaExpanded regional scope
ContextDuring Great RecessionPost‑COVID recoveryDifferent economic climates

Conclusion:
The arts and culture sector’s total economic footprint grew substantially between the two studies, even after adjusting for the fact that the later study occurs during pandemic recovery rather than economic expansion.

2. Employment Impact: Net Growth, but Slower Momentum

Measure20122025Change
Total Jobs Supported18,98311,986▼ Decline
Arts‑Organization Jobs10,046 (FTE)8,169 (headcount)▼ Decline

Important context:

  • The 2012 study used Full‑Time Equivalent (FTE) jobs
  • The 2025 study uses total job headcount (full‑time, part‑time, seasonal)

Conclusion:
While employment impact appears lower in 2025, this reflects:

  • lingering pandemic job losses, and
  • methodological differences between studies.

The 2025 report explicitly notes that recovery is ongoing and job levels have not fully rebounded.

3. Household Income: Significant Growth

Measure20122025Change
Household Income Generated$452.3M$611.3M▲ +$159.0M (~+35%)

Conclusion:
Despite fewer reported jobs, total household income rose sharply, indicating:

  • higher wages,
  • greater spending per job,
  • and stronger economic multipliers per dollar spent.

4. Government Revenue: Major Expansion

Measure20122025Change
Local Government Revenue$28.3MIncluded in $155.2M total▲
State Government Revenue$29.6MIncluded in $155.2M total▲
Total Tax Revenue~$57.9M (local + state)$155.2M (local + state + federal)▲ Nearly 3×

Conclusion:
The arts sector’s public‑sector fiscal return increased dramatically, strengthening the argument that arts funding produces measurable tax benefits at all government levels.

5. Audience Spending & Tourism: Mixed but Resilient

Measure20122025Change
Total Attendance11.3M8.2M▼ Decline
Audience Spending (Total)$269.1M$289.4M▲ +$20.3M
Avg. Spend per Attendee~$23.76$35.74▲ Significant increase
Non‑Local Attendees26.8%19.5%▼ Decline

Interpretation:

  • Fewer attendees, but
  • much higher spending per person, especially among visitors

Conclusion:
Tourism volume declined post‑pandemic, but economic efficiency per attendee increased, meaning each visitor now contributes more to the local economy than in 2012.

6. Community & Social Impact: New Growth Area (2025 Only)

The 2012 study focused almost exclusively on economic metrics.
The 2025 study adds measured social impact:

Indicator (2025)Result
Community pride inspired89.0%
Would feel loss if venue closed84.9%
Venue seen as community pillar80.6%
Importance for future generations85.9%

Conclusion:
This represents a major expansion of impact measurement, showing that arts and culture contribute not just economically but also to community cohesion, identity, and well‑being—an area not quantified in 2012.

7. Equity & Inclusion: New Findings in 2025

  • No equity‑specific analysis in 2012
  • 2025 study finds:
    • Attendees at BIPOC/ALAANA‑serving organizations spend more per person than average
    • Social impact levels are equal or higher than regional norms

Conclusion:
The 2025 study demonstrates that equitable investment does not reduce economic impact and may enhance it—an insight entirely absent from the earlier study.

8. Summary of Growth vs. Decline

Areas of Clear Growth

  • ✅ Total economic activity
  • ✅ Household income generated
  • ✅ Tax revenue generated
  • ✅ Audience spending per person
  • ✅ Measurement of social and equity impacts

Areas of Decline or Constraint

  • ⚠️ Total attendance
  • ⚠️ Share of non‑local visitors
  • ⚠️ Job counts (pandemic‑affected and methodologically different)

Bottom‑Line Comparative Conclusion

2012 conclusion:

The arts are an economic anchor that proved resilient during recession. The nonprofit arts and culture sector in St. Louis delivers measurable returns in employment, income, tourism, and public revenue, while enhancing quality of life and regional competitiveness.

2025 conclusion:

The arts are economic infrastructure and social capital, delivering higher total impact, stronger fiscal returns, and measurable community benefits—even while still recovering from a historic shock.

Overall takeaway:
Between 2012 and 2025, the arts in Greater St. Louis became more economically powerful per dollar and per attendee, more clearly tied to public revenue, and newly recognized for their social and equity impacts, despite pandemic‑related declines in attendance and employment.

Differences of Study Methodologies

1. Scope of What Is Measured

2012 Study (Arts & Economic Prosperity IV)

  • Focused almost entirely on economic impact
  • Core measures:
    • Total economic activity
    • Jobs (reported as Full‑Time Equivalent jobs)
    • Household income
    • Local and state government revenue
    • Audience spending and tourism
  • No formal measurement of social or community impact

2025 Study (Arts & Economic Prosperity 6)

  • Measures both economic and social impact
  • Adds new dimensions:
    • Community pride
    • Sense of loss if venues disappear
    • Arts as community “pillars”
    • Intergenerational value
    • Equity and inclusion outcomes

Methodological shift:
The 2025 study intentionally expands beyond “dollars and jobs” to capture how arts and culture affect community well‑being, making it a broader, multidimensional impact study rather than a purely economic one.

2. Definition of Jobs

2012

  • Jobs reported as Full‑Time Equivalent (FTE)
    • Combines part‑time and full‑time labor into a single standardized unit
  • Emphasizes labor volume

2025

  • Jobs reported as total headcount
    • Includes full‑time, part‑time, and seasonal jobs
  • Reflects people employed, not labor hours

Why this matters:
A decline in job numbers between studies does not necessarily mean fewer people working fewer hours—it reflects a different counting method, compounded by pandemic‑era labor disruption.

3. Geographic Definition

2012

  • Geography: St. Louis City and County
  • More narrowly defined region

2025

  • Geography: Greater St. Louis Area
  • Explicitly defined and consistently applied across AEP6 regions

Methodological implication:
The later study uses a broader and more standardized regional definition, improving comparability across regions but complicating direct historical comparisons.

4. Audience Spending Measurement

2012

  • Audience spending measured
  • Lower average spending per attendee
  • Smaller audience survey sample
  • Fewer methodological controls described

2025

  • Audience spending remains a core differentiator but:
    • Larger survey sample
    • Clear exclusion of on‑site spending to avoid double counting
    • More detailed breakdown of local vs. non‑local spending
    • Explicit travel‑purpose questions

Methodological improvement:
The 2025 study uses more refined audience‑intercept techniques, improving precision and reliability of tourism and spending estimates.

5. Treatment of Equity and Representation

2012

  • No explicit equity framework
  • Participation skewed toward larger, more established organizations
  • No demographic or community‑of‑color analysis

2025

  • Equity is methodologically embedded
  • Includes:
    • Intentional sampling of BIPOC/ALAANA‑serving organizations
    • Multilingual surveys
    • Equity‑focused participation targets
    • Explicit caution against harmful comparisons

Methodological shift:
The 2025 study corrects for systemic underrepresentation in earlier studies, changing who is counted and whose impact is visible—this can affect totals and averages in meaningful ways.

6. Treatment of External Shocks (Recession vs. Pandemic)

2012

  • Conducted after the Great Recession
  • Results framed as resilience during economic downturn
  • Study‑to‑study comparisons implied as valid

2025

  • Conducted after COVID‑19
  • Explicitly warns:
    • Study‑to‑study comparisons are not recommended
    • Pandemic caused structural disruption in attendance, staffing, and operations

Methodological stance change:
The 2025 study is more conservative and transparent about limitations in longitudinal comparison, whereas the 2012 study was more comfortable with trend comparison.

7. Underlying Economic Modeling

2012

  • Used customized input‑output analysis
  • Earlier generation of economic modeling tools

2025

  • Uses IMPLAN platform
  • More granular industry modeling
  • Region‑specific economic “fingerprints”
  • Higher computational rigor

Result:
The 2025 estimates are methodologically more precise, but not directly interchangeable with earlier model outputs.

Bottom‑Line Methodological Difference (Plain Language)

2012 study:

“How much money and how many jobs do the arts generate?”

2025 study:

“How do arts and culture function as an economic industry and as social infrastructure—and who benefits?”

Because of:

  • different job definitions,
  • expanded geography,
  • new equity sampling,
  • social‑impact measures,
  • and post‑pandemic disruption

Summary

This blog compares two major economic impact studies conducted for the Regional Arts Commission (RAC)—the 2012 Arts & Economic Prosperity IV study and the 2025 Arts & Economic Prosperity 6 study—using a framework that integrates governance, political function, and economic impact. Examined side by side, the studies reveal how both the scale and the meaning of “impact” have evolved across two very different economic eras: the Great Recession and the post‑COVID recovery.

Across nearly all economic indicators, the arts and culture sector in Greater St. Louis demonstrates substantial growth. Total economic activity, household income, audience spending, and public tax revenue all increased markedly between the two studies. Even where declines appear—most notably in attendance and job counts—those shifts are shaped by pandemic disruption and important methodological differences, rather than by structural weakness in the sector. In fact, higher spending per attendee and stronger fiscal returns suggest that the sector has become more economically efficient over time.

The 2025 study also marks a significant shift in what is measured and valued. Unlike the 2012 study, which focused almost exclusively on dollars, jobs, and tax revenue, the later report incorporates social, community, and equity dimensions. Measures of community pride, perceived loss, intergenerational value, and equity outcomes position the arts not only as an economic engine, but as social infrastructure that supports cohesion, identity, and public wellbeing.

Taken together, the two studies show that economic impact analysis is not static. It reflects changing economic conditions, improved methodology, and evolving public expectations about accountability, inclusion, and value. For RAC, these studies function as more than technical reports—they are tools for governance, political legitimacy, and sustained public investment.

Much of what is written in the impact studies is to signal to constituents that all is well and resilient in tough times.  RAC is funded through the St. Louis City and County hotel tax.  Both studies include at least the amount arts visitors spend in this area.  But, as the total number of visitors declined in 2025, RAC added categories in audience spending related to retail shopping, clothing and accessories, and miscellaneous.  Many hotels have a gift shop.

They’re addressing both a political and an economic function through this data.  The inclusion of equity and diversity of audience with their economic impact is similarly addressing a response to political and governance issues. 

Conclusion

The comparison of RAC’s 2012 and 2025 economic impact studies illustrates how arts and culture have moved from being framed primarily as an economic asset to being understood as both economic infrastructure and civic capital. Over time, the sector has grown more productive per dollar invested, more transparent in how impact is measured, and more intentional about whose contributions and benefits are recognized. This is typical of responses to governance and political interests weighing in on the operations of an organization reliant on public funding.

Equally important, the evolution of these studies reflects a broader shift in public governance. In an environment of fiscal scrutiny, political polarization, and uncertainty around public funding, impact analysis serves as a bridge between numbers and public purpose. The 2012 study helped affirm the arts’ resilience during recession; the 2025 study extends that narrative by demonstrating recovery, adaptability, and social relevance after an unprecedented disruption.

Ultimately, this comparison underscores that the value of the arts cannot be reduced to attendance counts or job totals alone. Their true impact lies in how they circulate resources through the regional economy, return revenue to public systems, strengthen community identity, and contribute to a more inclusive civic landscape. For policymakers, funders, and the public, the lesson is clear: sustained investment in arts and culture is not merely a discretionary expense—it is a strategic investment in economic vitality, democratic legitimacy, and the long-term wellbeing of the St. Louis region.

(Author’s note: Much of the data presented is based on audience self assessed surveys. The sample of 1,973 audience members includes 401 members identified in the BIPOC/ALAANA communities in the 2025 survey)

Governance and Political Considerations

List of appointees to the Regional Arts Commission appointees with title, who they represent and expiration of their term.

Above is a list of current appointees to the Regional Arts Commission appointees with title, who they represent and expiration of their term from the county boards and commissions page. St. Louis City has similar information on their website with regards to operations and duties.

Organizational Structure Summary: Political, Economic, and Governance Considerations for the Regional Arts Commission

The Regional Arts Commission (RAC), legally established under state law as the Regional Cultural and Performing Arts Development District, operates within a multi-jurisdictional governance structure that reflects both political representation and economic purpose. Its structure, authority, and functions are shaped by statutory mandates, public appointments, and its role in regional cultural development.

Governance Structure
The Commission is composed of fifteen members, with eight appointees representing St. Louis County and seven representing the City of St. Louis. All members are appointed by the chief executive of their respective jurisdictions. This structure embeds the organization within a formal layer of public governance, linking its operations directly to elected leadership and state-authorized oversight. Because the Commission exists by statute, its activities and performance are subject to scrutiny not only at the local level but also by state legislators, creating an environment where organizational challenges can quickly escalate into public or political concerns.

Political Considerations
The RAC’s mandate to unify cultural and performing arts organizations across the region carries inherent political dimensions. By organizing and supporting a broad arts constituency, the Commission functions as a coalition-builder that aligns cultural stakeholders with public officials and major funding interests. This alignment can strengthen regional advocacy for the arts but also exposes the organization to political pressures. Any operational failures or controversies risk becoming politicized, particularly given the ability of legislators and other officials to intervene or amplify concerns.

Economic Considerations
Economically, the Commission plays a central role in stewarding public funding mechanisms, including revenues derived from hotel and motel taxes. Its mission links cultural development with regional economic impact, positioning the arts as both a public good and an economic driver. Political instability or governance challenges can therefore have direct economic consequences, potentially undermining funder confidence, discouraging participation, or threatening the sustainability of supported organizations.

Interdependence and Organizational Stability
Political, economic, and governance functions within the RAC are closely interdependent. Disruption in one area can destabilize the others, increasing organizational risk. In such circumstances, leadership intervention is often required to restore stability. These interventions frequently involve change agents who may pursue adjustments in operations, policy, or personnel to address underlying dysfunction and reestablish organizational credibility.

Unlocking Fiscal Benefits: St. Louis County and City Collaboration

Posted on by Leave a comment

Ever since the Great Divorce St. Louis City and County have been looking for ways to get back together, in one way or another. As government and the economy has gotten more complex it has become a reality that they need each other. Conversations around cost sharing began to happen and eventually the Missouri Council for a Better Economy solicited a study for City-County collaboration focused on cost sharing.

Essentially, they were looking to find opportunities for economies of scale between the entities. Collaboration without a vote of the people. The following is a summary of key pieces of the executive summary of that report with a downloadable policy brief. St. Louis County enjoys a fairly high rate of purchasing power, in part because it has minimalities within to partner with to help drive down costs. Budgetary constraints or storage capacity in the city often prevent the single entity from flexing the same muscle.

A former chief executive relayed this example years ago. He said road salt is a good example, and this is somewhat hypothetical at this time as it may be the city and county are collaborating more closely when it comes to salt. Municipalities and county transportation use salt on roads and the county has storage capacity to purchase for the estimated need of the whole winter season. This drives down costs significantly. St. Louis City, on the other hand, may have to buy a barge at a time, over time, to spread out the costs because they are at capacity.

St. Louis County government maintains what is referred to the matrix. It’s a spreadsheet of every agreement it has with municipalities to provide services such as inspections, plan review, and police support. This improves capacity for St. Louis County, creates efficiency of service and provides for better purchasing power. They do this in a number of areas. On the other hand, St. Louis City is often left to their own devices, which leads to higher costs with a constrained tax base. It should be pointed out that St. Louis City has been growing that tax base significantly in the last decade. But the economic constraints remain and collaboration would go a long way in burden sharing in the region.

Policy BriefDownload

City of St. Louis and St. Louis County Intergovernmental Collaboration Study– The PFM Group

Key Context and Issues –

1. Structural Fragmentation

  • Missouri has an unusually high number of local governments, including counties, municipalities, special districts, and school districts.
  • The City–County separation (1876) created rigid boundaries with limited flexibility for addressing shared regional challenges.
  • Multiple constitutional amendments (1924, 1945, 1966) created legal pathways for cooperation or consolidation, but all consolidation efforts have failed due to insufficient support.

2. Fiscal Pressure as a Catalyst

  • The 2008–2009 national recession significantly reduced revenues for both City and County governments.
  • Budget stress increased the urgency to pursue shared services as an alternative to structural consolidation.

3. Existing Regional Cooperation

  • The report emphasizes that cooperation is not theoretical—numerous regional efforts already exist, including transportation, cultural institutions, and large facilities.
  • Beyond high‑profile examples, the report notes “scores” of less visible shared activities already underway.

Shared Services Framework

The study categorizes collaboration opportunities into four primary mechanisms:

  1. Economies of Scale – Combining operations to reduce per‑unit costs
  2. Combined Purchasing Power – Joint procurement to lower prices
  3. Co‑location – Shared facilities or administrative functions
  4. Excess Capacity Utilization – One government providing services for the other where capacity exists

Initiatives are further organized by:

  • Implementation timeframe (short‑term vs. long‑term)
  • Service delivery area

Major Service Areas and Key Findings

Administration

  • Opportunities for shared training, cooperative purchasing, and consolidation of administrative functions.
  • Significant savings potential from combined purchasing, particularly utilities, bulk commodities, and employee benefits.
  • Printing operations identified as an area where economies of scale are likely.

Health

  • Strong case for regional coordination, given that public health risks cross jurisdictional boundaries.
  • The report explicitly states that service quality and health outcomes may improve, but direct cost savings are unlikely to be substantial.
  • Non‑quantifiable benefits (“positive externalities”) are emphasized.

Parks and Recreation

  • Limited overlap between City and County systems.
  • Opportunities exist for joint volunteer programs and mutual aid agreements, but savings potential is modest.

Finance

  • Identified as a high‑potential area for shared systems.
  • Shared property tax assessment and collection systems could:
    • Produce economies of scale
    • Improve overall tax collections

Economic Development

  • The report notes a national shift away from jurisdictional competition toward cooperation.
  • Greater coordination, especially around federal grants, is expected to benefit both governments.

Human Services

  • Populations served (e.g., homeless services, workforce development, aging services) are well‑suited to regional or co‑located delivery models.
  • Other regions have achieved cost reductions and/or service improvements through such approaches.

Public Safety

  • The County’s electronic monitoring program is highlighted as a model the City could leverage to reduce incarceration costs for non‑violent offenders.
  • Additional cooperation is suggested, though police services are largely excluded due to state governance structures.

Public Works

  • Opportunities include:
    • Joint fuel purchasing
    • Fleet standardization
    • Standardized code enforcement to reduce costs for both governments and residents

Cost Savings Analysis (As Stated in the Report)

  • The report repeatedly emphasizes that precise savings estimates are difficult due to:
    • Political feasibility
    • Implementation complexity
    • Resource availability
    • External economic factors
  • Not all initiatives have quantifiable fiscal impacts.
  • Despite these limitations, PFM concludes that:

If key initiatives are successfully implemented, combined annual savings could range from $10 million to $40 million in 2011. Savings may be increased today when adjusted for inflation. Some recommendations have been initiated or concluded, such as in economic development. It has been about 15 years since the Economic Development Partnership has been created. It might be worth reviewing whether the expected cost savings were realized

Conclusion on Cost Savings

Based strictly on the document’s findings:

  • Meaningful cost savings are achievable, but they are unevenly distributed across service areas.
  • The largest and most reliable savings are likely to come from:
    • Administrative consolidation
    • Cooperative purchasing
    • Shared financial systems
    • Public works standardization
  • Health and human services offer strong service and outcome benefits, but limited direct fiscal savings, according to the report.
  • The projected $10–$40 million annual savings range should be understood as:
    • Dependent on sustained political support
    • Incremental rather than immediate
    • Strongly tied to execution quality rather than policy intent alone

Overall conclusion:
The study positions intergovernmental collaboration not as a one‑time budget fix, but as a long‑term cost‑containment and service‑improvement strategy. Financial savings are real and potentially substantial, but the report makes clear that governance commitment and implementation discipline are the decisive factors in realizing them.

Initiatives vs. Savings Certainty

Initiatives vs. Savings CertaintyDownload

Reentering St. Louis County: Legal and Political Insights

Posted on by Leave a comment

Introduction

Recently, County Executive Dr. Sam Page stated he thought the City should enter the county as a new municipality. There are currently 88 cities, towns, villages, and unincorporated areas throughout St. Louis County. I’ll discuss the difference of these in a future blog, but bringing St. Louis City, a charter city. A charter city is a municipality that operates under its own “home-rule” charter rather than general state laws. This is interesting considering the state recently took over St. Louis City’s police department, again. In theory home rule allows local residents to define their own form of government, powers, and administrative procedures, provided they comply with the Missouri Constitution. There are 42 charter cities in Missouri.

Terry Jones, author of Fragmented by Design – Why St. Louis Has So Many Governments, wrote a policy brief for the Public Policy Research Center in 2011 discussing the implications and feasibility of one variation of St. Louis City-County reunification, reentry of the city into the county. the PPRC is now a part of the Community Innovation and Action Center at the University of Missouri- St. Louis. Below I summarized the the policy brief and then discuss some of the key thoughts and findings. Keep in mind, this policy brief was published before Better Together attempted to reunify the city and county, which ended disastrously for many reasons. I’ll get into that later. But I bring it up because there may have been legislation between 2001 and now, intended to help Better Together, that changes some of these findings. As we review studies we’ll uncover a lot of ways the city and county differ in governance and some of those issues have to be addressed before reentry can happen.

The conclusion of the brief is that reentry is feasible, but not without it’s own issues. This will also take time to form the vehicle for reentry, create a plan, and inform the people, and have them vote on it. All along the way, studies will be drafted and polling will occur in order for regional leadership to thread the needle of democracy.

Summary of Reconciling the Great Divorce: The City of St. Louis Reentering St. Louis County

Overview

The policy brief examines the legal, administrative, and political implications of the City of St. Louis reentering St. Louis County as its 92nd municipality. Drawing on Missouri constitutional provisions and historical precedent, the author argues that while reentry is legally feasible and often viewed as the most practical reunification option, it presents complex structural challenges that require careful resolution (Jones, 2011).

Key Findings

  1. Reentry Is Constitutionally Permissible and Politically Feasible
    • Missouri’s Constitution explicitly allows the City of St. Louis to reenter St. Louis County.
    • Among several consolidation options, reentry is widely viewed as the least disruptive to existing City and County autonomy and thus the most politically viable (Jones, 2011).
  2. The Process Is Voter-Driven and Highly Structured
    • Reentry would require voter-initiated petitions in both the City and the County.
    • A Board of Electors would be appointed to develop a plan, which must then be approved by concurrent majorities of City and County voters.
    • The board’s authority is broad and cannot be restricted solely to reentry, increasing uncertainty in outcomes (Jones, 2011).
  3. County Functions Would Likely Shift to St. Louis County
    • If reentry occurs, the County would probably assume most or all “county functions” currently performed by the City, fundamentally altering City governance responsibilities (Jones, 2011).

Major Problems and Challenges

  1. Integration of Non-Judicial County Functions
    • The City and County organize functions such as tax collection, revenue administration, and record keeping differently.
    • Transferring City offices into County departments raises unresolved questions about organizational structure, efficiency, and employee placement.
  2. Judicial System Consolidation
    • Reentry would eliminate the City’s status as an independent judicial county.
    • This would require merging court systems, prosecutorial offices, jail facilities, and jury pools—posing logistical, legal, and political challenges.
  3. Employment and Labor Protections
    • Missouri’s Constitution protects the employment rights of displaced City workers.
    • It remains unclear whether affected employees would transfer to County employment or remain on the City payroll, creating potential financial and legal conflicts.
  4. County-Like Functions Performed by the City
    • The City independently manages functions typically handled at the county level, such as:
      • Economic development
      • Property assessment
      • Public health
    • Post-reentry, policymakers must decide whether these functions should be merged into County systems or remain uniquely City-operated.
  5. County Council Representation and Redistricting
    • Reentry would require redrawing County Council districts.
    • Decisions about the number of districts and how City voters are distributed raise concerns about political representation and equity.
  6. Special District Governance
    • Joint City–County entities (e.g., Metropolitan Sewer District, Zoo-Museum District) are built on shared governance.
    • Reentry could destabilize these arrangements as other municipalities question the City’s continued influence.

Conclusion

Terry Jones concludes that while City–County reentry is legally possible and superficially attractive, it would trigger far-reaching institutional changes. The process would be lengthy, politically demanding, and likely dominate regional civic debate for years. Any reentry plan must address not only governance efficiency but also representation, labor rights, and regional equity.

Jones, E. T. (2011). Reconciling the great divorce: The City of St. Louis reentering St. Louis County (Policy Brief No. 25). Public Policy Research Center, University of Missouri–St. Louis.

Adding Context and Reviewing the Policy Brief

One of the key findings of Fragmented by Design (2000) is that if the municipal or major regional governments don’t want to take blame or responsibility for the needs of the people then they create a special government entity to manage the issue. In doing this, we have gotten Metropolitan Sewer District, Great Rivers Greenway, and the St. Louis Economic Development Partnership, which is actually an umbrella organization of state authorized programs or political subdivisions. There are good reasons for these to be external. But their structure is regionally focused at least between the city and county, and GRG includes surrounding counties as well.

However, we have found our structure of governance is also duplicative in services, varying in capabilities among regional populations leading to inequities, and funded through varying tax structures. The policy brief lays out political implications of changes, such as the ability of the City to retain powers, like appointments to these regional governance organizations I mentioned. Regional boards and commissions get appointed by the county executive and mayor through a mix of city and county and sometimes state governor appointments. Recently, the St. Louis County Council has tried to require more input through the approval process of some of these appointments, adding a layer of politics that can be a wedge at times.

The key takeaways of this brief, I think, are in the transfer of powers questions. Will the city want to turn over its county responsibilities now, like collector of revenue and judicial and prosecutorial responsibilities to the county? Dr. Page may have provided a baked in solution when he called for reentry. He also called for the county to move offices into the city.

Proposals for the county to reestablish a physical presence in the city also intersect with broader economic conditions. According to Cushman & Wakefield, at the end of 2025 St. Louis City recorded an 18.5% office vacancy rate, with the Central Business District reaching 26.0%. Strategic relocation of county functions could therefore serve both governance and economic revitalization goals. That is considered high and has a significant impact on local restaurants and can lead to a compounding of economic problems and crime. Over the last ten years, the commercial vacancy rate has been 16-20%.

Simultaneously, the county has to vacate its administration building by December 2027 because it is not up to code in the City of Clayton. It is unlikely city reentry would happen by then. But given the average vacancy rate of the city this solution appears possible and would only strengthen the City’s economy. Keep in mind, City reentry would cause some county functions managed by the city to be transferred to St. Louis County already.

Currently, the St. Louis County Charter requires the county seat to be in the City of Clayton. All this really means is that the county council must meet there. Offices have already operated around the county. But in the last 15-20 years there has been significant decentralization of services from Clayton to surrounding areas. For instance, the St. Louis County Department of Transportation and Public Works moved its offices out to N. Lindbergh Blvd from Clayton over a decade ago. In 2012, the Department of Health built a new headquarters on N. Hanley Road.

Decentralization has been happening for some time and has not appeared to disrupt services or management coordination. So, moving some operations into the City makes functional sense, while solving certain city occupancy issues, should they continue. The question is, which offices or departments and where in the city? One may presume the Central Business District, but that may put a burden on regional stakeholders who established offices near Clayton. Clayton is already on the east side of the county. Moving it further from businesses on the western edge may be met with resistance. Again, this goes to the question of what gets moved and where.

Conclusion: Aligning Authority, Accountability, and Place

The governance challenges facing the St. Louis region are not simply the result of inefficiency or institutional inertia. They are the cumulative outcome of deliberate decisions to separate authority from accountability through a proliferation of special districts and regional entities. While many of these structures were created for sound functional reasons, their collective effect has been a fragmented system that duplicates services, varies widely in capacity across communities, and obscures responsibility for outcomes.

As the policy brief makes clear, the most consequential questions now facing the region are not about consolidation for its own sake, but about the transfer and alignment of powers. Decisions about whether the city should relinquish certain county‑level responsibilities, how appointments to regional boards are structured, and where governmental functions are physically located all reflect deeper choices about who governs, who benefits, and who bears the political risk of reform.

Proposals for county reentry into the city, including the relocation of offices and operations, illustrate this tension clearly. Such moves are not merely symbolic or logistical. They carry real implications for economic activity, accessibility, and the balance of power between city and county stakeholders. At the same time, they offer an opportunity to rethink how governance structures can better support both regional efficiency and urban revitalization, particularly in the context of persistent office vacancy and decentralization trends.

Ultimately, any meaningful reform of regional governance in St. Louis will require confronting the tradeoffs that fragmentation has long deferred. Aligning authority with accountability—and doing so in a way that promotes equity across the region—demands more than technical fixes. It requires political clarity about the purpose of regional institutions, transparency in how power is exercised, and a willingness to reconsider long‑standing assumptions about where government belongs and whom it serves.

Adaptation to Change

Posted on by Leave a comment

I once read it took the English over 100 years to adopt the use of the fork while dining. The English saw the fork as an extension of what they called French effeminacy and argued the proper way to eat is by using one’s own hands.

And, at one time in France, women were believed to be of ill repute if they were seen out at night dining. It took a lady of high status to join friends in a very public display to change people’s minds. In this story, she is a prop for the purpose of public relations in, what I remember to be, a new fine dining restaurant seeking to succeed. This one event had a remarkable change, not only on the culture but on the economy of France. The French, long known for their love of spectacle, created a market for spectacle based on what could have been a scandal. It is difficult to criminalize what, and who, we love.

We often see change as a right. Change is analogous to choice and if we choose mashed over fried potatoes is of little consequence until we decide to have rice. But, can we get rice? The feelings are not the same when we are told we will be getting rice when we want fries. People like options, but they don’t like being force fed.

This is similar to the state St. Louis is in right now. We have nothing but change on the menu today. The idea of having to adapt to change is fed by fear and that is a bitter meal.

We are trying to welcome new-comers to our region to grow. Any region trying to compete has population growth on the menu. This includes growing our foreign born population. St. Louis is an insular place with tremendous civic pride. We support our communities so much that we are often in the top 1% in charitable giving in the whole US.

Some are also trying to effect social change. There are big fights between progressives and conservatives in the region wanting to see more equitable solutions from local government. Ferguson, a small suburban city in the region, has been a catalyst and a choke point in this effort.

A police shooting of a young, unarmed, Black man in Ferguson launched protests and conversation about what our region was doing wrong. The event came four days after the first Black county executive was ousted from office under a dubious campaign calling him corrupt. I was a member of that administration and remember the chorus singing the tune of corruption, which was nothing but dog whistles.

But before these two events there was unemployment through a prolonged downturn in the economy. The Black community was hit harder than most and inequity would be the timber which would soon ignite into fire.

And, just before the events in Ferguson would become a symbol of dis-function in the region, a group called Better Together (BT) would launch their efforts to restructure the city and county governments and limit the authority of local governments like Ferguson. By erasing the imaginary lines of city boundaries in favor of a unified regional government, they argue a common voice can lead us to a better position in the global economy.

Their early internal polling showed that the region is against the change BT want, but not necessarily the rest of the state. BT saw that, after hearing messages about the benefits and problems with status quo St. Louis, statewide voters moved to be more favorable to voting for unification compared to the voters in the region.

The poll identified the vehicle of change: a statewide vote. And now, this is the biggest fight in the region. In fact, regional consolidation includes the fight for equity and the growth of the region. But as much as a consolidated region can improve equity, mostly through spreading planning decisions like low-income housing and improving access to workforce development and jobs for all, consolidation means concentrated power.

Concentrated power is a big part of what people are against. Until yesterday, it was certainly what I had been against because I don’t trust the person who would have been running the whole show. The BT plan was to skip the regularly scheduled election and instill the current county executive into the newly created metro mayor position. Not only does the new position benefit from stronger powers to govern and make decisions the position includes a greater portion of the metro area and limits the local control of existing municipalities within that area.

Fortunately, the current county executive is being investigated by a federal grand jury for contract rigging and will not most-likely not be continuing his “service” for much longer. But the structure of the government and power of the metro mayor do not change, just the first design on who would conceptually lead the region.

Most people are against a centralized government that would largely erase the hyper-local city governments in St. Louis where people reside. This is why a statewide election is the only possible vehicle to get the outcome BT wants. Restructuring the St. Louis region is not in the interest of the people who live their today. It is in the interest of the people who will come after them. The quaint communities that makeup St. Louis are the embodiment of living nostalgia. But they are all past their peak.

The statewide vote raises serious issues of self-determination and rights. It is certainly an infringement on the concept of government for the people and by the people. Here, self-determination is in conflict with the notion that cities are creatures of the state. The state does have an interest in the future well-being of St. Louis. But does it have the right to direct a change that has been in conversations for over 100 years?

We have to acknowledge the slippery-slope and comparative analysis fallacies that go along with this discussion, but we will attend to them at another time. These are statements that if they do it to St. Louis, they can do it to X and then the comparison of X city either in the region or another state. These hypotheticals are pointless because they are too simple and ignore the complexities of regions, especially in St. Louis.

The present policy Better Together is pushing is all about control. The City of Champ is a model example. It exists in St. Louis County and was built on the idea of being a domed Olympic stadium. That never came to fruition, and the 518-acre incorporated village became a landfill. It is a corporate town with just enough residents (14 or so) to keep it from being dis-incorporated (everyone who lives their works for or is related to workers of the company).

As it stands, Champ has full self-determination as prescribed by state law. But a landfill is a messy business when it comes to governing. Consolidation would likely mean a change in tax structure for the business and possibly reconfigured regulations. Mostly it means a wholesale shift in their political power.

Proof of this comes from those who would most likely want to see this operation change. Whether or not an environmentalist lives near an environmental issue is rarely of consequence to them. Changing the structure of governance would have a real impact on the possibility of regulation change in this instance. Businesses tend to want something close to complete self-determination for themselves.

The policy implications are such that there are community benefits as well as concerns. For the few people who live in Champ, it is pretty evident that they lose a lot of their voice for a government that attends to their concerns. They may start getting more services, but it changes the fact that it is actually most consequential to them and the greater St. Louis region. That is, why live here?

In some rural communities, cities are fighting for their lives against laws regulating CAFO’s. A CAFO, or concentrated feeding operation, produces a lot of environmental waste and disruption in the form of dust, runoff and foul smelling air. They aren’t good neighbors. The legislature in Missouri has been debating legislation which would make it impossible for counties to regulate CAFO’s. This is good for these businesses but not for the greater community.

The same could be said of the Better Together proposal. Most industries we have in St. Louis would certainly benefit from having one government and code. Policies like these, pushed for the benefit of businesses, can have dramatic effects on communities.

But, just as most people like a good steak, our trash has to go somewhere. How do we meet these needs while maintaining control of our community. There is a lot of value in noticing similar constituencies between residents fighting CAFO’s and residents fighting BT.

BT claims one regional government will implement efficiencies that don’t exist today. But this is also a false argument because of the vast majority of municipalities in St. Louis County contract with the county for inspections on electrical, plumbing, building and other codes. This means those cities are mostly using the code adopted by the county already.

So if we’re all ordering off the same menu already, albeit with multiple logos, why is one menu with one logo better? What does the new menu have that we don’t already have? And what can one menu provide that 90 can’t?

Let’s go back to graft. Our county executive mentioned earlier is on display for exactly what people should be most concerned with in this deal- contracts. Contracts are big business and the reality BT is not dealing with is that contracts, just like tax credits, can be bought and sold. Since the 1950s, the St. Louis region has created dozens of private organizations to manage public services.

Transportation: Metro (once called bi-state), Great Rivers Greenway

Municipal: Metropolitan Sewer District, Zoned trash contracts, private water supply, Regional Health Commission

Economic Development: The St. Louis Economic Development Partnership (EDP) is a regional eco devo service operating an umbrella organization of about a dozen entities empowered to manage loans, grants, land reclamation, oversees regional industry sector development. It operates under a formal agreement between agencies in the city and county through the brand of the EDP, which is dissolvable.

Entertainment: St. Louis Zoo, Botanical Garden,

These entities and more operate through agreements with the city and county. For instance, St. Louis County has a sales tax for transportation. There are other taxes but this is just an example for simplicity sake. They can use that money to provide transportation in just about any capacity they want. But, through the structure of the organization of the board for Metro elected official have some control over operations.

Metro is the only real game in town for what we consider public transportation and considers that revenue stream as theirs. But cabs could also become public transportation as well as Uber and Lyft. This would certainly change the politics of the St. Louis Metropolitan Taxicab Commission. It would change the nature of service delivery and change the market in many unknown ways. With modern technology, diversification may actually lead to more efficiency in the short run, but not meet all the needs in the long run.

Consolidation may meet regional needs in the long run. But, that is only if the person in charge values equity, efficiency, productivity and the perceived value of existing communities over political ties and power. The BT failure is that they are putting faith in government over the pride of communities. How can we have faith in government while our leaders are doing a perp walk?

For the past 60 years, St. Louis created private and quasi-public organizations run by nonprofits to provide infrastructure and services to the region. This increased complexity actually limits local communities from tapping into their tax base. It also hides things of value form the public, like contracts.

Major change like the one proposed should come from within an institution and branch out. Forced change not only faces questions of legitimacy, but also rips people’s sense of buy-in away. The English, in one way, rebuked change that seems like a beneficial idea all because of where it was coming from. The French embraced change because of who it came from and why.

If the state decides we are required to change people will eventually adapt to the change by attrition. That is those opposed to the change will do their best to vote with their feet or die trying. But I don’t see the change being of any consequence to the run of the mill resident. I see the change as an attempt to manage procurement and bigger contracts to fewer organizations. Whoever has control over the contract process will have control over the well-being of the region. Let’s hope they stay out of jail.

Triangulating Outcomes

Posted on by 2 Comments
Source: St. Louis City Planning
Sources: City of St. Louis Board of Elections

Column-
1: Wards
2: Republican Governor’s Vote- 2016
3: Lewis Reed’s vote in the 2013 Mayor’s race
4: Francis Slay’s vote in the 2013 Mayor’s Race
5: Mayor’s Race vote total between Reed and Slay
6: Slay’s vote minus Reed’s vote in the Mayor’s Race
7: Reed’s Vote in the BOA President race
8: Nasheed’s Vote in the BOA President race
9: Green’s Vote in the BOA President race
10: Total Vote in the BOA President race
11: Mayor’s Race Total Vote Minus BOA President Total Vote

The 2019 President of the Board of Alderman race is exactly what the Democratic Party needed at this time in St. Louis. A three-way race between a black male and white and black females shows exactly where the splits are in St. Louis. And there’s a good chance we can extrapolate this information to show the same veins in the county.

The table above tells a hell of a tale on that race. The first column of Republican voters for governor. You may be asking why I would include something like that in a primary race for the Democratic nomination. The answer is to show there are republicans that turn out. But when it comes to the mayor and BOA president race these Republicans vote Democrat. Sure, not all of them. But a lot do. And even if it’s only half, that’s enough to win in yesterday’s race.

Reed demonstrates this by winning four wards where there is significant Republican voting.

I include the results from the mayor’s race to show the old guard outcomes. It appears that Reed has taken control of most of that Republican vote to maintain control of the BOA. However, his performance is not as good against progressive females in Democratic precincts. In other words, the conservative Slay coalition has switch over to Reed and the Reed coalition largely split between Nasheed and Green on racial lines, based on racial mixes of wards. The city of St. Louis machine is in flux.

Reed maintained a relatively stable vote per ward garnering no less than 200 votes in all but 2 wards, while winning only 5. Nasheed won 13 and Green took 10. Most wards way under performed compared to the mayor’s race, which is to be expected when issues like less money come into play. One report pegged the total spending at $1m. But Green pushed 3 wards to increase their vote in the BOA race and Nasheed and Reed each pushed one.

Each candidate’s outcome is interesting by what it tells us of St. Louis at this time. In the context that all incumbent aldermen won their races we would expect Reed to coast to victory. And he may have coasted. Green looked to solidify her progressive base, but lost African American support to Nasheed, who ultimately saw neither she or Green could win a three-way race and publicly asked for a sit down with Green.

The problem there is that Nasheed and Green were fighting for the hearts of activists and Reed fought for the heart of the city- a centrist leader versus two liberals.

The mechanics of this race are peculiar. Looking at the first five wards, which are largely Black wards, Reed lost to Nasheed almost 2:1. He was closing in on 3:1 against Slay in the mayor’s race. That’s a big flip in the other direction for him. Notwithstanding the decline in turnout, Reed should be concerned with what comes next for him.

But, if it is the case that the progressives can now run the town it appears that Nasheed and Green should sit down to decide what that means and how they should run it

For the progressives, they now have a treasure trove of data to resolve. When the precinct data comes out they will be able to triangulate what comes next with a clear vision.

But, they have to ask themselves if this vision is shared or if it is mutually exclusive.


All food is local

Posted on by Leave a comment

A college professor once asked my class to write an essay explaining why all politics is local. A young man raised his hand and said, “what if you don’t believe that.” I sat there quietly a little swollen in my chair at the foolishness of the line in the sand the guy was drawing.

The professor’s shocked face gave all the reply the class needed. “What else could it be,” he replied. “If you don’t agree with that statement you had better have a good reason, and that is the point of the paper anyway. So as long as your focus is on the idea that all politics is local you should write your essay explaining what that means.”

Harold Laswell says that politics is who gets what, when and how. We can apply this definition to everything you do. Every decision you make in life is a political decision and answers the question can you do X.

We tend to think that politics is about voting or whether we have certain rights. We want to push politics out of our lives when all we are doing is not recognizing everything we do is political. If you’re thinking right now that money decides who gets what when you’re kind of like that kid in class and not recognizing the central point- politics happens before economics.

Have you ever tried chicken feet? There’s a restaurant in St. Louis I like called the Mandarin House. They serve authentic Chinese cuisine and when you go with a friend from the community you will probably hear about how what most of us order isn’t authentic Chinese food. It’s an interesting discussion because like you I’ve had my fill of General Tso’s chicken.

A few years ago some friends were telling me about problems we were having with Chinese restaurants. The health department was cracking down on how they prepared food. Cooks were leaving food out too long before it was being prepared. This can cause problems because bacteria grow at temperatures between 40 and 140 degrees Fahrenheit.

The United States Department of Agriculture has all kinds of regulations and recommendations for food handling. This is important because for most of the food we consume it goes through a process of being broken down and transformed within a supply chain. Their guidelines define how long you should let food sit out before cooking and then once cooked what temperature you need to hold the food at and even how long you can take to cool food for storage. It’s a complex system designed to prevent people from getting sick.

Those standards, it turns out, also don’t fit the cultural traditions of some chefs who weren’t trained in the US, as I’m told. It may be they came from a place that was either lax in these standards or they knew these standards and just ignore them. The reality is if you don’t follow these rules you will, eventually, get people sick.

Many restaurant owners in the Chinese community felt they were being targeted because they weren’t passing their health inspections and being threatened with fines or being shut down.

I was introduced to the Mandarin House by then Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadal who I worked for a few times in the past when she needed a local person to help with things in her district. If you think she’s wild on twitter ride around all day for a few month with her. You’ll see her whirlwind life is a passion for the people in her community. She’s kind of like water: if there isn’t a way she’ll make one.

Maria introduced me to the Mandarin House with an intern who was from the community. We didn’t go to the buffet. Instead, we chose from the dim sum carts and that’s the way to go for a real experience. The food is amazing and intricate and the texture is nothing like Western food.

One of the items we had was chicken feet. Not every place on earth has the commodity hog, beef or chicken we have in the US. In fact, we didn’t always have those beasts at the level we do now. People had to make do with the food they had and animal protein was sparse. Bone marrow is a trendy dish now in part because it tells a story of who we use to be.

Chicken feet will set some people off but it’s really good and a fun dish, in part because you can’t help but break etiquette to do it properly. To make chicken feet you have to boil them forever in high-temperature water, broth or sauce. The tendons need to break down and they become loose and then get cooled. Here in lies a problem based on where you’re from. Some might take them straight to a refrigerator but they should actually go into an ice bath.

The ice bath not only lowers the temperature quickly passing the danger zone but it also seizes up the feet making it a crispier product when you finally fry it.

So the dim sum cart comes along and Maria chooses for us and there are the chicken feet. I’m listening to how my company passes on Americanized Chinese food and that they have never really tried it because it lacks the flavor. So here I am jamming chopsticks into my mouth and twisting the feet around and sucking on knuckles. I slide the bones back between the chopsticks with my tongue and place them clean back on the plate, no different than a wing besides the utensils.

I mentioned I had never had the opportunity to eat chicken feet before and I was curious. They watch me maneuver the morsels and ask me what I think. I kid you not, I said it tastes like General Tso’s chicken because it did. Right down to the sauce the feet were served in. It was crispy, chewy and tasty. And I moved on to the pork bun.

Whether you eat chicken feet today is first a political decision because it answers who gets what, when and how. Whether you’re eating chicken breast or feet is an economic question. Economics is about choice where politics is about decisions. Once you have choices you can then make a decision. Politics decided that it is possible to serve chicken feet so long as you follow certain rules along the way.

The issues with the restaurants made it’s way up to the ninth floor and the health department convened a meeting with the offended parties. Staff from the county executive’s office attended and the situation was discussed as a group. St. Louis County government is the chief regulator of restaurants within its boundaries where food is concerned.

As an aside, Urban Chestnut in the Grove is actually regulated by both the City of St. Louis and the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) because they produce liquor on site and distribute it around Missouri and other states, who also regulate them. But, the restaurant itself falls under local jurisdiction.

The county adopts a code and implements it locally. It also implements it across the board and applies it the same to everybody regardless of the municipality the business is in. It’s one uniform code. But the purveyor has to choose which municipality to set up in.

Between the city and county we have the choice of some 90 municipalities, unincorporated space and the City of St. Louis. The politics is different among all of these places and the city county merger can’t change that. Why? Because all politics is local and neighborhoods will always determine who gets what, when and how. Right?

The Mandarin House set up on state highway 340 in University City because they wanted to be in U City, right? Well, they wanted to serve their authentic cuisine to a population who would appreciate it. They wanted their customers to have a reasonable drive to get to them. So they chose to be located on that stretch of 340 known as Olive Boulevard. If you click on the embedded link above, you will see that 340 runs through multiple municipalities.

That Wikipedia page states the entire route is in St. Louis County. If you Google Olive Boulevard you are shown a map that designates 340 as running into the city ending at North Skinker Parkway. This is important to the Mandarin House because they want their customers to be able to find their way in the easiest way possible.

All customers know that the commute is a part of the experience of eating out. How you get there and home is as important as whether you have water placed in front of you when you sit down. If the commute sucks that will likely taint the whole experience. How do I know this? Because some restaurants make getting there a part of the experience. Ever heard of the Safe House?

But if I were to leave from Ellisville and go to eat in U City I would pass through multiple municipalities who all have different feelings about the state highway running through them. To my knowledge, the state has responsibility for the entire stretch. However, they hear from the different communities in different ways and at different times.

The Mandarin House probably doesn’t lobby a lot about the condition of 340 out front. But the fact that a state legislator likes to go there likely means that if they need to ask questions about its condition they know who to talk to, as do the city administrator and mayor of U City. As do the same people in Ellisville where you will find a Pasta House.

This is another popular place in our region and franchises are available. So if you were interested in buying this franchise what would you do? You’d talk to the county about health code and then probably talk to a couple different cities. Why? Because you need to be informed on each of their own codes, which may or may not have slight differences.

In reality most cities in St. Louis County actually use county code for buildings. The answer is straight forward, economics. These cities can’t afford to manage the technical needs of building code. But before it’s an economic choice, the county made it a political decision. They won’t implement individual codes for each muni. Public Works in the County keeps a matrix to keep track of which city they have a contract with to manage electrical, plumbing and other codes. But each city the county contracts with uses the adopted County code.

This leads to some interesting lobbying from school districts, city aldermen from county munis and business. Enter the raw politics most people can’t abide. I’ll tell some of those stories another time.

But, if you wanted to start a business, would you want to spend time getting to know all of your choices? Or, would you prefer knowing you had one place to deal with?

If it’s a choice of chicken feet or chicken breast you’re really talking about economics. But if I were having dinner with Laswell, I’m pretty sure we would focus on the fact that this choice doesn’t go away because both are regulated the same way.


A Story from St. Louis

Posted on by Leave a comment

St. Louis is spinning right now! We are just now starting to see real movement out of years of inaction after events in Ferguson rocked our community. We were severely divided. My father-in-law is a retired police officer from St. Charles County, near St. Louis, and my daughter is a social justice-minded teenager and aspiring artists. I am a political operative who wrote the St. Louis County policy on human relations, created a bi-state human relations commission and has worked for progressive politicians who often put inequity on the table. Needless to say, my daughter’s mouth takes after me.

A couple of years ago, when Ferguson erupted, members of my family immediately took polar opposite sides on issues. Many saw Mike Brown as a punk who got what was coming to him for attacking a police officer. My daughter posted a lot on social media about how people are treated by police, especially people of color. Something she believed was unfair and needs correcting. This was met by backlash from my in-laws. My side of the family is largely non-existent on social media because they’re teachers and you all can’t control your kids.

My wife ended up in the middle of a firestorm. She was being told by her brothers and sister what to do, which is never a good place to be. Her father wasn’t talking to anyone in my house and posted some hurtful things about his grand-daughter online. Sides were taken and there was no shaking anyone out of it. Essentially we all moved on from each other for a while.

That’s St. Louis for you. We’re a bunch of municipalities of different ages and maturity who occasionally take sides against each other. Now, the question is: If we could come together, can we address our issues and actually solve problems?

St. Louis City is a charter city in Missouri. It has about 308,000 people according to the census bureau’s 2017 estimate. The city has been shrinking since the middle of last century and has been ranked last according to some reports in growth. Updated reports place St. Louis a little higher these days. But, if you’re in the business of big sales, that isn’t enough for most people these days. We’re in a global economy and we need to act like it.

The city separated from the county over the same issue: You can’t tell me what to do or who to be.

The solution we are debating is should we get the family back together. The reality is that we’re different people since our big fight. In St. Louis we call this split “The Great Divorce.” The event, outcome and failed resolution have had drastic consequences. But so too has other policy on the region.

We once had an amazing trolley system. We were a connected place. Kenneth Johnson’s Crabgrass Frontier describes a St. Louis where weekenders would go to Kirkwood and Webster Groves. Those lines were scrapped in favor of automobiles and the interstate highway system bulldozed through neighborhoods speeding up suburbanization into St. Louis County.

The way we are connected in this region constantly changes. We continue to lay tracks, invest in a virtual persona, and rebuild those highways. As such, the conversation has evolved and a resolution is expected to be put in front of us in 2020. While the outcome is not certain, a parent’s command of you will fix this is hoped for by some and frightens many in the region.

Some claim the many municipalities in the county hamper economic growth. And others point to the city as an example of being too big and failed. Social media is being filled with pockets of the city where neighborhoods look rundown. Neither side recognizes the thriving neighborhoods of the region that exist because of and despite the separation. Our focus is on the question of, can we thrive better if we act more as a singular family unit under one direction?

Do we lose our individual perspective if we act as one? Will we be seen only as one if we join forces?

Over the summer and fall, I spent a lot of time in Michigan for work. I had never heard of Troy, Sterling Heights or Royal Oak, which are all suburbs of Detroit. This place is massive. Detroit itself is reported as 142.9 square miles through a Google search. The Census Bureau calculates the urbanized area to be 1,337 square miles. That makes it 11th in the U.S. in the urbanized area even though Detroit City ranks 64th in size by area compared to other major cities. It should be noted that 14 of the cities on that list above Detroit don’t have a population of 100,000.

So in this global economy, if it makes sense for St. Louis City and County to merge, why not Detroit? Well, first, St. Louis City is 66 square miles according to a Google search, other estimates have it being less. Either way, that’s a pretty small community. But there are still over 300,000 people living in that little place.

Using Census figures Governing Magazine puts the density of St. Louis City at 5,030 people per square miles. You’ll notice that’s respectably high for population density.

St. Louis County is another story. Google says it’s 523 square miles. The City of Wildwood in St. Louis County is 67.08 square miles making it larger by area than St. Louis City. The Census estimates the counties population to be 996,726 residents. The county is almost eight times the size and only three times the population. Could it be more populous if one government was managing growth?

It’s been a few years since the uproar in my family. We’ve largely grown in our own ways since then, much like the region where we all live. There hasn’t been much reconciliation from anyone. We do our best to support each other in our own ways. The parallels to the city and county are striking. Both issues will always be there. It’s become a part of who we are in many ways.

Nobody has the opportunity on any side to just walk away from each other because we are, in all reality, bound to each other for good and bad.

It is said cities are creatures of the state. If a city acts outside the intentions of the state’s interest they can be forced down a different path. In 2020 we may see the state take St. Louis City and County down another path. Emotions are high on both sides. Personal identity is at stake and individuality is on the line.

So what will we do? Will we see the common interest is not what our individual want reflect but that together we can address the bigger problems. Or should we hold on to what we want at this time despite the fact years pass and new needs emerge?

I invite you to explore St. Louis and discover how much fun you can have here. I’ll be exploring St. Louis over time and discussing what I enjoy here. If you have questions message me and I’ll try to point you in the right direction. But I would point out that I can’t contrive your experience. You will need to explore what works for you along your own path.