Megan Green Favors “Mega-Merger” of Governments in St. Louis City and County

PUBLIC OFFICIALS IN ST. LOUIS CITY AND COUNTY who want to fix the region’s fragmentation should pursue a “mega-merger” as part of a “complete reorganization” of government, and the area’s school districts should be consolidated, too.

These are among the positions outlined by Alderwoman Megan Ellyia Green, one of three main candidates in the race for president of the city’s Board of Aldermen, in response to questions on governmental consolidation from McPherson. Green and State Sen. Jamilah Nasheed hope to unseat incumbent Lewis Reed in the March Democratic primary; Reed is running to retain his position.

“This fractured region cannot compete nationally or globally if we are too busy competing with the municipality down the road,” said Green, an outspoken progressive on the board whose 15th Ward covers an area of the city immediately south of Tower Grove Park. “I would support a merger that would make this one city/county.”

McPherson reported last week that Better Together, a nonprofit group backed by civic leaders and business executives including retired financier Rex Sinquefield, is working on a proposal for governmental consolidation that it hopes to unveil in January. While specifics of the proposal are still being developed, one leading possibility is that Better Together will put forward a concept for the unification of St. Louis city and county, according to people familiar with the process. Such a move would transform local government and create a “new” St. Louis with 1.3 million people.

Discussions about closer cooperation or some type of combination of the city and county have taken place for several years, but they’ve gained steam recently as Better Together moves closer to making formal recommendations. As a member of some of the city’s most powerful decision-making bodies, the president of the Board of Aldermen could help shape the outcome of any consolidation process.

McPherson posed four questions to the three main candidates for board president. The complete responses from Green are below; they’ve been lightly edited for style and clarity. McPherson will publish responses from other candidates in separate articles.

McPherson: Would you support a full-blown merger between St. Louis City and St. Louis County? If so, what conditions would need to be met in order to ensure that such a merger serves the interests of St. Louis City residents?

Megan Elliya Green: I do support a unigov/mega-merger. One thing that every St. Louisan in the city and county knows is that we are wasting money on the dozens of police departments and fire departments and other layers of government that can benefit from consolidation of certain service providers. This fractured region cannot compete nationally or globally if we are too busy competing with the municipality down the road. I would support a merger that would make this one city/county. If it works for Chicago and it works for New York City, it can work here.

To have a plan that works for the benefit of St. Louis City residents, such a plan would have to ensure that communities of color and historically marginalized communities have strong representation in this new government, and that the systems that are established as part of this new government are designed to dismantle the vestiges of restrictive deed covenants, redlining and other racist policies that the St. Louis region has so famously pioneered, in accordance with the recommendations of the Ferguson Commission. To this end, a unigov plan must also include a plan to consolidate our fragmented school districts and property tax bases to ensure that all kids have access to a quality public education that is adequately funded, no matter what ZIP code they are born into.

Last, with the St. Louis region acting as a singular entity we can increase our power and clout in Jefferson City and begin to retake this state back for the Democratic Party.

2. If you don’t support a merger, do you support consolidation of any type? Should the city rejoin St. Louis County as a regular municipality, for example? Or should it stay independent?

Green: On this note, I don’t support anything less than unigov. I do not support the re-entry of the city into the county. If that happens, the city’s earnings tax, over $130 million — one-third of our city budget — will disappear. And St. Louis County will have one more big, bankrupt municipality without the ability to pay for vital services. I cannot see any benefit to city residents or county residents in that scenario.

3. If you support consolidation, what do you think should happen to the city’s earnings tax?

Green: I’m not clear on exactly what you mean by consolidation, but if you mean anything less than a complete reorganization of every government in the city/county region, then I do not support it. If we are going to work as one region we need to pool our resources as one region.

The city needs to keep its earnings tax. And based on the constitutional amendment passed by Rex Sinquefield and his Better Together consultants, any re-entry means a new city charter, which means a new city that would be prohibited from charging an earnings tax. Elimination of the earnings tax would automatically force the city into bankruptcy and we could guarantee that Sinquefield and his crew would be in the wings waiting to privatize any and all public assets. We must view these efforts to eliminate the earnings tax as simply a means to push a pro-privatization agenda designed to increase corporate profits on the backs of taxpayers.

4. Rex Sinquefield’s involvement in St. Louis politics often evokes strong responses from city voters. Do you think you could find common ground and work with Mr. Sinquefield — either directly or indirectly — on issues facing the city, if you felt it was in the best interests of the city’s residents? (This means any issue, not just the topic of consolidation.)

As I mentioned his name in the last answer, I think your assumption that Mr. Sinquefield’s involvement evokes strong responses is correct. I would not have any issue working with him, or anyone who will help address the best interests of the city. However, Mr. Sinquefield and his consultants have done exactly the opposite. I stand for transparency in government, getting money out of politics, and helping everyday St. Louisans get adequate city services, not pay more money for them.

Mr. Sinquefield will receive millions in dollars in reimbursement from the city if his consultants suggest that we sell the airport, which is exactly what he wants them to do. That’s not charity; he and his team are modern-day profiteers, working to line their pockets with our tax dollars. The fact that Sinquefield’s Better Together consultants did not study our inordinate number of school districts and fragmentation of our educational system as part of the challenges our region faces, most likely because the existence of public schools does not fit within his privatization agenda, demonstrates this bias and non-holistic approach to examining our region’s issues. When government restructuring is being led by ideological billionaires who seek to outsource government to the private sector in order to make more profits for the few at the expense of the many, I think that we need to act with caution.

I am the only candidate in the race for president of the Board of Aldermen who has never taken campaign donations from Sinquefield and his many PACS. Any efforts at a merger must be resident-led, center on those who have been most negatively impacted by our current fragmented system, and be enacted with broad support and buy-in from St. Louis city and county residents.

Editor’s note: This story was updated on Dec. 27 to correct the spelling of Green’s full name. McPherson regrets the error.