While I recently started a thread based on Marjorie Arons-Barron’s opposition to eliminating ward city councilors, I neglected to do the same when former Alderman Marcia Johnson wrote in support of the idea in a TAB column.
Some people are concerned that doing away with ward-only councilor seats will result in less responsive councilors. All councilors, however, both ward-only and at-large, are equally able to handle constituent services. Councilors Sangiolo and Hess-Mahan — both at-large — are two great examples of responsive, problem-solving, action-oriented representation. With today’s technology, unlike 43 years ago, when we last changed the charter, all members of the council are accessible. It is not the access, but rather the response and actions that matter.
Also on the same topic be sure and read John Sisson’s urge for calm and perspective in discussing the Charter Commission’s work.
While I appreciate the shout-out from my former colleague about my level of service to my constituents, it is not at all easy. I am able to carry out my Ward services as well as my city-wide services due in large part to the collaboration and coordination I have with my fellow Ward 4 Councilors – Harney and Gentile. I rely heavily on Councilor Harney for outreach – particularly coordinating and organizing neighborhood meetings and notifying residents of upcoming meetings or development proposals. I also unfortunately, continue to be unemployed and have the luxury of time which most of my other working colleagues do not.
Was there a thread that cited Cuncilor Baker’s well thought out and expressed views on this topic?
yes
I find many of the reasons I have read over the past weeks, to eliminate ward councilors to be superficial, and dogmatic.
I found Marcia Johnson’s opinion piece to be interesting. I have known her for many years, and found her to be quite responsive as an alderman; so I do not dismiss something she has to say out of hand.
But, her article is primarily broken down into two parts, the unique history of how ward and at large representation came to be, and why it does not conform to the norm. (not a particularly strong argument for change)
The other portion, is her view of the inefficiency of the Board in general, taking up issues such as taxi medallions, or weighing in on state or national issues. Neither of these or other examples, are due to ward representation, but the overall structure of the Board.
To suggest that some at large councilors, in her mind( and mine) do a good job of constituency work, in not justification for the elimination of ward representation. In fact, the same argument can be made regarding the excellent constituent services by some ward councilors. (So, by that reasoning, you could just as easily argue for getting rid of at-large representation.)
I have yet to read a strong argument for why the elimination of ward representation will make for better representation. Which of course, is the point.
Great point Neal. I read former Alderman Johnson’s piece and thought “we could make taxi medallion re-ups an administrative task without changing the whole structure of the Council.” I have also been in touch with councilor colleagues and staff about moving some Traffic Council decisions to the administrative staff. There is a lot of interest in streamlining where possible, and it can be done without reducing local elected representation.