I remember Houston getting their city council election system thrown out because it was all at-large seats - such a system, the courts said, disenfranchised minority voting blocks. (At the time, it was a very effective way to keep Latinos off the council.)
It's always made me suspicious of at-large districts, despite the "citywide" perspective. I agree with Earl that citywide costs more to run, and that's a demerit in my eyes. Just a belief, but one mayor or 33 percent of parks commissioners seems enough. (Of course, IRV provides some nifty twists on this, but that's a related discussion.) In analyzing the Gurban split, I wonder what effect labor endorsements have on the division. Not just formal endorsements, but actual want-to-win. I remember hearing that some DFL-endorsed commissioner candidates were discouraged from marching with other DFL endorsees who did not have enthusiastic labor support. Can anyone remember how major labor endorsements broke, and who had the actual labor-leader support in their races? David Brauer Kingfield REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
