������Ƶ

ST. LOUIS — A citizen panel tasked with reforming city government is about to put its ideas to the test.

After nine months of brainstorming and debate, the St. Louis Charter Commission has in recent days published seven proposals to remake City Hall.

The list is a doozy: One change would eliminate the elected comptroller position and abolish St. Louis’ three-headed executive branch. Another would reorganize city departments. A third would move all municipal elections to August and November.

“There are some very big changes,” said Aldermanic President Megan Green.

If the recommendations are ultimately approved by voters this November, they would herald a rare and seismic shift at City Hall. They could streamline bureaucracy, make the city easier to govern and bring St. Louis more in line with its peers across the country.

But a major obstacle looms as they near the finish line.

Thanks to a surprising legal decision last month, the recommendations have to get through the Board of Aldermen before they can go to voters.

Scott Intagliata, vice chair of the commission and a City Hall veteran, said he’s not too worried about having to corral votes at the board.

“It’s a political process, so there’s always a little bit of apprehension,” he said. “But I think we’ll be able to present a good case.”

Comptroller Darlene Green, however, has long opposed the elimination of her office, which she says is a bulwark against corruption.

Mayor Tishaura O. Jones hasn’t weighed in on big changes — but said she looks forward to public input.

And aldermen have reacted with mixed emotions to the news that they’ll need to debate and vote on the proposals, with a tight deadline to boot.

“Those meetings are going to be a cluster,” said Alderwoman Cara Spencer, who represents part of downtown and several neighborhoods south of it.

Results could be historic

Aldermen themselves proposed the formation of the Charter Commission in 2022.

The charter is the city’s foundational document. It lays out the basic rules and responsibilities of municipal government.

But aldermen said it was in desperate need of an update, with parts dating back to 1914. And they wanted those changes to be devised as independently as possible, mindful of past failed reform efforts headed by political insiders.

They have mostly succeeded. After voters approved the idea last April, aldermen and the mayor worked to appoint a list of nine residents largely lacking boldface political resumes. Commissioners have since embarked on a close reading of the 200-page charter, taken testimony from experts, activists and officials, and held lengthy discussions on what needs to change.

Earlier this month, they offered their conclusions:

Like reformers before them, they recommended dissolving the city’s Estimate Board, the unusual three-member body — composed of the mayor, comptroller and aldermanic president — that approves the city budget and spending. Such a move could clear the way for a simpler, more conventional back and forth between the mayor and aldermen.

They called for consolidation of streets planning, engineering and construction functions in a new Department of Transportation.

They advised cutting the elected comptroller job and splitting its responsibilities: Financial controls and payment processing would be led by a professional finance director appointed by the mayor. New auditing powers and a slew of other functions aimed at making government more transparent would be handled by a new, elected “public advocate.”

The commissioners also forwarded plans to give the mayor the power to directly hire key appointments like the police chief and personnel director, to remove obsolete language such as descriptions of the mayor that only include male pronouns, and to move city elections to August and November of even years in an effort to goose turnout.

If passed, the results would be historic. Political scientists and good-government groups have been calling for changes like the breakup of the Estimate Board for decades. Originally envisioned as a check on corruption, critics now regard the board as more of a chokepoint enabling unnecessary political maneuvering and delays in decision making.

But the commission is only halfway home.

‘Take personal politics out of the equation’

Members have called a public hearing at 7 p.m. July 1, at Julia Davis Public Library, 4415 Natural Bridge Avenue, where residents can weigh in on recommendations.

And on July 12, a final draft is expected to be introduced at the Board of Aldermen.

The aldermen who pushed for the commission tried to avoid that step. ������Ƶ wrote in their bill that the commission would submit their amendments directly to the city Election Board.

But a retired police officer and civic critic sued, saying that only the aldermen themselves could submit charter amendments per the state constitution. And in a move that surprised several aldermen, a city attorney said in a court filing last month that is what the board would do.

Green, the aldermanic president, said she’d like to honor the plan’s original intent and put the commission’s recommendations on the ballot by the Aug. 27 deadline.

“We created the charter commission to take personal politics out of the equation,” she said.

But at least three other board members are already hedging.

Alisha Sonnier, of Tower Grove East; Rasheen Aldridge, of downtown; and Michael Browning, of Forest Park Southeast applauded the commission’s efforts.

But they said some of the changes are so big and will have so many ramifications for city procedures that it’ll be tough to get it all through the board by the deadline.

Killing the Estimate Board and replacing the comptroller position will be especially tough, they said. And aldermen could always incorporate the commission's suggestions in their own amendments.

“There’s a very high likelihood that we don’t pass all of these amendments,” Browning said. “But I could change my mind once I hear the arguments.”

Editor's note: This story has been updated with the location of a July 1 public hearing on the proposed charter amendments.