There are a lot of great ideas floating around
concerning council resturcturing, my breakdown:
GEOGRAPHIC vs. IDEOLOGICAL representation
It seems that most people who advocate for at-large
representation also desire electing these
representative via proportional representation. This
speaks to Wizard's call for "minority representation",
which I took to mean minority ideology, not race,
would be an excellent way to give Republicans, Greens,
Libertarians, etc. at least a chance to represent
like-minded citizens of Minneapolis - I think this is
long overdue, and I cannot believe that a
non-Democratic coalition has not evolved to fight for
this (or maybe one has?).
It also seems like many people who wish to keep the
ward system we currently have, advocate an IRV system
which will allow for better debate, a clearer mandate
of representation, as well as giving voters a
gradiated preferencing tool whereby our
representatives and our citizen-peers have a better
understanding of values we wish to perpetuate and
reward.
Obviously, the problem we currently have with a ward
only system is the dominance of one ideology running
the town (although, because of that, there is a
watering down of what a Democrat is in Minneapolis).
Even with IRV this problem would persist, though, I
believe to a lesser degree, because of the reasons
listed above.
The problem with a proportional representation only
system would be the dominance of parties, and the
decline of independent or maverick candidates, which I
see as a serious and debilitating problem. (As far as
I know PR does not work outside of a party schemata).
NUMBER OF MEMBERS
As far as number of councilmembers, I cannot get a
handle on the reasons we would want fewer, I suppose
the arguments are that it either it saves money or
that there is not enough to do as it is. As far as
saving money, we could reduce the level of pay, they
make 60-something (correct?) and whatever they recieve
in per diem and other benefits (anyone know what these
might be?) Concerning work load, from what I gather,
they put in at least 60 hour weeks and probably closer
to 80+ - maybe Julie Ostrow, or members themselves,
could shed some light on "the workweek".
Gene Martinez makes the excellent point that more
councilmembers would act to dilute the power of each.
Thus making the proces of "kingmaking", as he said,
less charged and less independently important. It
would also act to dilute the voting power of each
member which I cannot think of a downside of.
JON'S IDEAL COUNCIL
Here you are - keep the current 13 wards and elect
these members via IRV. Add four or six at-large
members who are elected via proportional
representation. The understanding with the at-large
members is that they are essentially free to represent
the city/citizens in an issue based capacity - one
member choosing economic development, one schools, one
infrastructure, police, etc...
Please respond with input, the main criticism I see
coming is that the system would be too cumbersome by
using two forms of voting, this I would be willing to
trash (I don't even know if it is legally feasable),
in which case I would dump IRV for the ward candidates
and keep PR for the at-large members (this is an
initial gut reaction to the flaw and not thought out -
feel free to comment on this aspect as well.)
good day
jon k
bryant
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
