TS says: > The way I see it > a.) Minneapolis and St. Paul would always be in control. Never a good > thing for the rest of the Metro area. b.) More volatility every 4-8 > years, but at least the pendulum swings back and forth. c.) Not a bad > idea. I wonder how many other urban areas around the country have an > equivalent council. > Although the current met council is appointed, the districts from which members are appointed are redistricted by the legislature every decade. If you look at the existing districts the proposition that "Minneapolis and St. Paul would always be in control" is completely wrong.
Minneapolis has 2 1/3 of the council districts (the other 2/3rds of district 6 being suburban). St. Paul has 1 1/2 district (the other 1/2 of district 13 being suburban). So Minneapolis and St. Paul combined can effectively control only 3 and possibly 4 of the council's 16 districts. Randall Cutting Minneapolis _______________________________________________ Twin Cities Metropolitan Issues Forum http://www.e-democracy.org/tcmetro Rules: Sign posts with real name. You may not post more than twice a day.
