South Como residents discuss possibility to secede from District 6

Posted

Which district council should represent the South Como neighborhood is the topic of a meeting at 6 p.m. Wednesday, January 9 at the Como Lakeside Pavilion. As the Monitor went to press the Como Community Council (District 10) and District 6 (North End-South Como) Planning Council were discussing ground rules for the meeting.

By JANE MCCLURE

Texas isn’t the only place wanting to secede. Which district council should represent the South Como neighborhood is the topic of a meeting at 6 p.m. Wednesday, January 9 at the Como Lakeside Pavilion. As the Monitor went to press the Como Community Council (District 10) and District 6 (North End-South Como) Planning Council were discussing ground rules for the meeting.

One sticking point may be how residents weigh in and what percentage needs to seek a change. A number of District 6 leaders want people to vote in-person, not electronically, noting that not everyone has computer access. Any change would have to be voted on by the district councils and approved by the City Council.

The issue is not a new one. Some South Como residents contend their interests would be better served by District 10. Others have claimed that being in District 6 negatively affects their property values, although that is in dispute. Both District 6 and District 10 board members oppose making changes and have conveyed those sentiments to city officials, including Ward 5 Council Member Amy Brendmoen. But Brendmoen has asked that the councils meet with South Como residents. Brendmoen also asked St. Paul Planning and Economic Development (PED) staff to research the issue of boundaries for the two districts.

Brendmoen said the boundary issue is something that came up when she was campaigning and that she is responding to constituents’ requests. Residents have said they feel their interests are more geographically tied to Como than to the North End.

But a change could have financial implications for District 6, which could lose 10 to 15 percent of its city funding. Funding is based on population, ethnic diversity, employment and poverty levels. The city is currently using 2010 Census data to make recommendations for 2013.

District 10, because of its small size and low poverty rate, wouldn’t get additional funding if South Como became part of its district.

What frustrates District 6 volunteers is that they haven’t heard directly from any residents who claim to want to secede from District 6. Although District 6 has many good volunteers, board and committee members from South Como, board members said there is always room for more. Board and Land Use Task Force Members said they have worked hard to be responsive to South Como issues, but when people don’t bring concerns forward, it’s hard for the council to know what the issues are.

“We would like to get more South Como people to be involved,” said District 6 Land Use Task Force Member Ronna Woolery. “We don’t hear anything and then this comes out of the blue.”

District 10, for its part, would like the boundaries to remain as they are. One reason for that is because the current configuration gives Como Park itself two councils and not one to advocate on park needs and issues.

Yet another concern, raised by District 6 Board President Ray Andreason, is that changing boundaries could set a precedent for the entire city. “I think we have to be mindful that this could set a precedent, that if people are unhappy with their council, they can ask to opt out.”

When the district council system was established in 1975, city officials and neighborhood residents used different factors to set boundaries – including areas covered by existing neighborhood associations, and physical barriers such as the river, bluffs and freeways. In St. Paul’s history, only two neighborhoods have successfully moved from one district council to another. In 1982, a neighborhood near West Seventh Street asked to opt out of District 15 Highland Park and into District 9 West Seventh Fort Road Federation. Residents were surveyed, both councils agreed to the change and it was adopted by City Council resolution.

In the late 1970s what was Southwest Area District Council (SWAD) split and became what are now Highland District Council and Macalester-Groveland Community Council. The size of SWAD and the number of issues that such a large council had to address were among concerns at that time.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here