Time for a change in how we elect the City Council?
Think about it. With the strong exception of Gary Sandberg, and the somewhat weaker exception of Chuck Grayeb, when is the last time at at-large member of the Peoria City Council assumes a leadership role in shepherding major project through the City Hall?
Meanwhile, the five district council members are constantly fielding phone calls from constituents with issues.
The current set-up is the direct result of a lawsuit settlement filed to increase minority participation on the council. Two of 11 members of the council are black, which isn’t great improvement in that area. And any political scientist will tell you that at-large election work against the election of minorities.
It seems to me that the city would be better served if members were elected from 10 distinct and smaller districts. There’s also an argument that could be made that Peoria would benefit from a strong mayor form of government, rather than the council manager we now enjoy. Yeah, I know that smacks of the pre-”reform” days of Mayor E.N. Woodruff, but I doubt we need to worry about speakeasies coming back.
The council alone could not decide to do this. It would require a referendum. It’s something to consider.
Billy Dennis is a former reporter and editor at small daily and weekly newspapers in Illinois and Missouri. He comments on media, news and politics. He also owns and operates 
“And any political scientist will tell you that at-large election work against the election of minorities.”
That isn’t quite true. Peoria chooses it’s five at-large members from the top 5 vote recipients. If the fifth ranked candidate only gets a 100 votes he still gets a seat even if #1 got 20,000 votes or #4 got 5000. If he only gets 5 votes and is still 5th he gets a seat. If the at-large candidates were being elected one at a time in a winner takes all situation, then yes it would work against minorities.
Bill, what’s an “argu”?
It’s a half-assed argument. Which is something you ought to be familiar with.