Fenton aldermen adopt resolution opposing statewide vote to change St. Louis government structure

The Fenton Board of Aldermen on Oct. 12 adopted Resolution R-25-01 urging the St. Louis County Council, Missouri legislators and the Municipal League to oppose any legislation that would authorize a statewide vote on changing the governmental structure of St. Louis City and St. Louis County and the municipalities within them.

The resolution, introduced and sponsored at the meeting by Alderman Breitschhaft, passed on a voice/roll-call vote after the board moved to waive rules for a second reading. A presiding official told the board that city staff and officials attended a large meeting in Clayton where State Representative Ian Mackey had advanced a bill authorizing such a statewide vote.

The nut of the resolution is local opposition to placing the fate of city and county governmental structure before the entire state. “This is something that we adamantly oppose,” the presiding official said during the discussion, characterizing the board’s view that it would be unfair for the state electorate to decide the local government arrangement. Alderman Breitschhaft volunteered to sponsor the resolution during the meeting.

Board members moved to adopt the resolution immediately by first asking to waive the usual rules for a second reading. The motion to adopt, moved by Alderman Breitschhaft and seconded by Alderman Jokers, passed unanimously in the roll call. Members recorded as voting “Aye” were Aldermen Breitschhaft, Jokers, Mezring, Huels, Clause, Harrell, Wisprack and Lang; the motion carried.

Meeting discussion referenced a prior resolution the board had passed “a year or two ago” opposing similar statewide action; the newly adopted R-25-01 reiterates that position. The presiding official also noted that the Clayton meeting was well attended, describing it as overflowing as local officials and staff heard about Representative Ian Mackey’s measure.

The board adjourned shortly after the vote. The resolution text lists no binding legal effect on the state legislature; it serves as a formal expression of the board’s opposition and a request that local and state officials oppose such legislation.

Several procedural details from the meeting: the board adopted R-25-01 by immediate adoption after waiving rules for second reading; the recorded vote was unanimous with eight ayes. No additional directions to staff, funding decisions, or implementation steps were recorded in the transcript beyond the adoption itself.