BE OUR GUEST: STEP BACK IN TIME TO THE DAYS OF WARD POLITICS IS NOT THE ANSWER TO GOVERNMENT

John Blue is a retired editor of the Southeast Missourian newspaper, and remains active in civic affairs.

Up to this point, except for those who have put the overture on the ballot, there has been practically no public discussion about the zone (ward) proposal before Cape Girardeau voters on Nov. 3.

Considering the long range impact of this proposal on the governance of the city, should it be passed, this is an egregious oversight by the public. There should have been a robust debate on this exceedingly important change in the way this city would be governed.

To go the zone (ward) system, in this writer's opinion, would be a major mistake for our community. This view is entwined with both personal experience and the history of government in our city.

Cape Girardeau, from its beginning years operated under an aldermanic form of government with council members elected by wards. The present wards, used principally for voting purposes, are the heirs to that beginning.

Ward lines have been drawn and redrawn many times over the 184 years, more or less, since original city incorporation.

There were bitter battles and ward disputes over those years. Finally the people had had enough.

Many cities across the country, ridden with ward bosses and political graft, turned to commission government for relief. Cape Girardeau was one of those cities. Seeing how effective this new government was, the people here, tired of the inept ward system, voted in 1918 to change their form of government and elected a city commission.

They rode the crest of the wave of municipal government change that was sweeping the country. Commission form of government served the city far better than the former aldermanic, mayor-council, type of municipal administration.

Wards continued to exist in the city for voting and miscellaneous other purposes, but not for governance. Council members were chosen at large and the mayor was elected separately on an at-large ticket.

All went well for a time, but after several years voters began to see flaws in their government. Instead of wards fighting each other for improvements to the detriment of the rest of the city, it became a tug of war between the various members of the council.

Under commission government, responsibility for municipal operations was divided among commissioners. The mayor usually, but not always, had the police department, another had parks, another supervised public works, another was head of the fire department. They doubled up on other branches of government.

The result was internecine warfare. The police commissioner was jealous of the fire department, both were opposed to funding for public works, there were battles over the parks. Everyone wanted more than his piece of the pie, and citizens got pie in the face.

There were at least three recall elections as voters became more and more disgusted with the inefficiency of the system.

This was happening all over the country and cities were dropping commission government, as the cliche goes, like a hot potato.

Cape Girardeau voters, worn by the bickering and inefficiency of their commission government, in 1965 voted it out and initiated council-manager government with council members elected at large.

It was a vast improvement over what had gone before. Efficiency returned to municipal operations. Finances were stabilized. Order came after chaos (one year there was no municipal budget). A trained professional manager who worked with the council and government was immeasurably better. It was not all sugar and spice, however. There were differences, but the city has been far better governed than under its earlier years of commission and ward elected mayor-council rule.

In 1981 voters changed their government again. They adopted a Home Rule Charter, which incorporated the council-manager form of government and at-large elections as its foundation. Under a Home Rule Charter, the city is enabled to write its own methods of operation and is not bound by the state statutes regarding cities of its class.

Cape Girardeau had been governed well under council-manager government both as such and as the key component of its Home Rule Charter.

At-large elections have brought knowledgeable people to its governing table. They have made mistakes. They have argued. They may not have acted at times in the best interests of some sections of the city, but they have governed and they have governed well in the full context of municipal rule.

This writer spent 40 years of his life closely involved in municipal government, both as municipal affairs reporter for this newspaper and as its editor directing the coverage of city government. The observations made here come from first-hand experience and the warning is not intended to be taken lightly.

The zone (ward) system being proposed by well meaning citizens would not be the cure they make it out to be. It would be a huge step back in time to the days of ward heelers, cronyism, trading favors by council members, each councilperson seeking an advantage for his or her ward over the others, deals struck among councilmen to benefit their ward(s), the whole bag of tricks that existed in the days when Cape Girardeau had aldermanic and then commission government. The chance of mischief making, and thereby poor municipal management, is too great for the people of this community to take.

Much is made by those proposing the zone (ward) form of government that they do not have representation. If they don't, it is largely the fault of those in the voting wards who now are complaining.

Research by the Missourian, and published a few weeks ago, showed that the poorest voter registration and the poorest turnout at the polls was in those wards where the greatest number of complaints have been registered.

The solution for the conditions cited is for those in the concerned wards to register and then vote in city elections for candidates favorable to their cause.

If, however, they or anyone else think that mayor-council, commission, council-manager charter forms of government or any other will do every thing they wish, they are engaging in an exercise of voter futility.

There is not now, nor will there ever be, a perfect form of government. A step back in time to the days of ward politics is not the answer to government in Cape Girardeau or elsewhere. Girardeans should vote "No" on this proposition Nov. 3.