While I did not serve a ward that changed by redistricting, I thought I might address the issue of whether council members would represent their old or new wards once the new lines were determined. I�d say both. Both in that the council members past associations with parts of their ward no longer in their district would not evaporate overnight. Council members who have been intimately engaged in their communities would still have the familiarity and relationships they did with the people and the circumstances of their old territories. They would be knowledgeable and interested, and while they might not attend every meeting they once did in their former turf, they would still likely be a voice on the council to support the interests of their old areas. In fact, the areas that swap form one ward to another may actually have a minor advantage over those areas that did not change. At the same time, they would automatically tend to focus on their new areas to quickly come to know the people and specific issues of their new areas, if only to be sure to have a chance at re-election. Anyone can win one election. The proof of the pudding is whether once elected you can be re-elected. For only then do we know where the promises made were carried out with enough grace and sensitivity to local concerns. Council members will naturally focus on the new configuration as soon as it is determined, and I am sure all the sitting members know where the proposed lines are now, and have all already given at least some thought to what these changes mean to them.
With all that said, I want to state that a lot of this discussion is in my opinion misguided. A council member may be elected from a ward, but their job is not just to represent that ward. It is to serve on the board of directors of the city of Minneapolis. They may have a special responsibility for their wards and the people, business and institutions that live and operate there, but they have no special powers to act in their wards. I think too much is made of that role. In fact, as I review my ancient history on the city council now getting on to two and a half decades and about to be three redistrictings ago, my personal opinions of my colleagues was inversely based on how ward oriented they were. Those who were only concerned about their wards were �ward heelers.� They tended to treat their wards as special and fought and connived to win goodies for their constituencies at the expense of the rest of the city. I have a lot more respect for those who attempted to promote the health and vitality of the city overall. While a practice we referred to as aldermanic courtesy has and will continue to exist, its role is and was far from absolute. It merely served to recognize that the locally elected council member is more likely to be affected electorially by the outcome of contested neighborhood issues. Barring issues with citywide or cross ward significance they should be allowed to make their own beds. In this new situation should an argument exist between a former council member and a new council member from a transition area exist, it will only highlight real issues that might otherwise have gone unnoticed by other council members. My guess is that these will be few, as the needs and aspirations of this city�s citizens do not vary significantly from block to block, neighborhood to neighborhood or ward to ward. Now I may be way off base on this as I was the last DFL�er to loose a primary election to another DFL�er in a primary in 1977. I don�t believe anyone actually got around to answering that when the question was raised here some months ago. I choose on occasion to do what I thought was right for the city as a whole even when it wasn�t necessarily popular among all my constituents. Example include rent control which I opposed in a ward that then was made up of 97% renters. And I think there was a stadium issue then to, although in hindsight I don�t believe I lost many votes do to that. I would still recommend John Kennedy�s Profiles in Courage to any elected official. The job isn�t to see which way the wind is blowing, it�s to take the time to gather the available information, consider the opposing arguments, (there are always multiple sides to every significant issue) and then to vote the best interests of the city as a whole. Even if on occasion you loose a vote or two, or if necessary, an election. This continual focus on us against them is a plague on representative democracy. The existing council members will automatically represent their new constituencies as soon as the lines are final. They will not forget their old friends and issues. I for one do not believe it is necessary to have new elections. Council members need to be aware of their local interests and make sure that the ramifications of city policy as they affect their constituencies are heard as part of the policy discussions, but in the final analysis local self-interest should not be permitted to trump sound city policy. Earl Netwal City of Minneapolis, a neighborhood in the twin cities metropolitan economic city-state. 5344 36th Ave S. Mpls., MN 55417 _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
