The North side vs the South side saga and our City Council (San Antonio: neighborhood, live)

[RedNeckRick]

I think it has less to do with the ethnic break down and more to do with the economic break down. The economically better off that live on the North side work to make and want to keep their money. The economically depressed areas are more of the obama thought pattern to steal from the rich to support their lifestyle while not contributing to the economic situation in SA. I think that most in the 8-10 districts will give freely of their own doing but will withdraw when forced to give to the slackers of society.

"Better to give a hand up than a hand out"

[txmusicgal]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRick

I think it has less to do with the ethnic break down and more to do with the economic break down. The economically better off that live on the North side work to make and want to keep their money. The economically depressed areas are more of the obama thought pattern to steal from the rich to support their lifestyle while not contributing to the economic situation in SA. I think that most in the 8-10 districts will give freely of their own doing but will withdraw when forced to give to the slackers of society.

"Better to give a hand up than a hand out"

Why are you bringing up Obama? He has nothing to do with any of the Districts in SA.


Back on topic so this thread doesn’t get deleted. I think there is a divide in SA between the North and South sides. It's the classic debate of the haves and the have-nots. San Antonioians are a major part of the problem with the in divide. Each side of town has preconceived notions about the other side. You have certain people from Stone Oak *not people from this forum but that Express-News article a while back* that think anything outside of Loop 410 is the South side. It seems like the East and West sides are always left out. It's hard to say that one side of SA gets more benefits than other side. What are the criteria involved in choosing which side gets more than the other?


I dislike how our City Council goes along with the 8 vs. 3 votes on issues. Each district should be able to vote however they want and not pit the districts against each other. Why can't it be about what's best for San Antonio? These are local issues and it shouldn't be a republican or a democrat thing. This has got to stop because we're not doing what's in the best interest for our city. This is why we have a North vs. South side divide. This is the reason I will not be voting for Briones. He's keeps mentioning that he's a republican with a conservative background. What does being a republican have to do with being on the City Council?

[Bo]

Originally Posted by txmusicgal

This is the reason I will not be voting for Briones. He's keeps mentioning that he's a republican with a conservative background. What does being a republican have to do with being on the City Council?

Briones is trying to "out" his main opponent, Nirenberg, as a Democrat, knowing that there are voters in that district who won't vote for a Democrat. AFAIK, Nirenberg hasn't claimed a party affiliation.

Since the city council and mayor elections are officially non-partisan, voters usually have to guess.

[chud]

Originally Posted by txmusicgal

Each side of town has preconceived notions about the other side. You have certain people from Stone Oak *not people from this forum but that Express-News article a while back* that think anything outside of Loop 410 is the South side. It seems like the East and West sides are always left out.

I don't think anyone in Stone Oak cared one way or another until a few years ago when Sheila McNeil, who served on the City Council in District 2, said that 281 should be turned into a toll road because everyone on the north-side who lives near 281 "can afford it".
She claimed that everyone north of 1604 makes $200,000 to $300,000 a year, which of course is not true; most of us are just middle class working people, and didn't appreciate Ms. McNeil's sense of entitlement to our hard earned wages.

[dastexan]

There are far deeper problems with the makeup of the districts than north v south.

I assume there are still great inequities between population per district.


I find it amazing that this city wants to continue to expand the city, but refuse to give these newer areas equal representation. And this isnt really a new issue.

The easiest solution in order to keep the inner city districts more or less in tact is to expand the council to 14 members.

But it would present the biggest thorn in the side of the Castro coalition and would then require actual debate on major issues in this city so it has a less than zero percent chance of happening while Castro is in office.

[Montirob]

Originally Posted by dastexan

There are far deeper problems with the makeup of the districts than north v south.

I assume there are still great inequities between population per district.


I find it amazing that this city wants to continue to expand the city, but refuse to give these newer areas equal representation. And this isnt really a new issue.

The easiest solution in order to keep the inner city districts more or less in tact is to expand the council to 14 members.

But it would present the biggest thorn in the side of the Castro coalition and would then require actual debate on major issues in this city so it has a less than zero percent chance of happening while Castro is in office.

But... the districts HAVE been redrawn so that they are equal in population. About 16,000 people had to change districts in order to make it work. See 16,000 S.A. voters' districts shifting - San Antonio Express-News

[dastexan]

I dont buy that its actually close to equitable on a voter to councilmember basis.


I mean when there was a what? 50,000 difference between the highest number of voters per council member to lowest and varying numbers in the middle, it makes no sense.


I thought they had to have no more than 10% difference between highest and lowest.

[RedNeckRick]

Originally Posted by txmusicgal

Why are you bringing up Obama? He has nothing to do with any of the Districts in SA.


Back on topic so this thread doesn’t get deleted. I think there is a divide in SA between the North and South sides. It's the classic debate of the haves and the have-nots. San Antonioians are a major part of the problem with the in divide. Each side of town has preconceived notions about the other side. You have certain people from Stone Oak *not people from this forum but that Express-News article a while back* that think anything outside of Loop 410 is the South side. It seems like the East and West sides are always left out. It's hard to say that one side of SA gets more benefits than other side. What are the criteria involved in choosing which side gets more than the other?


I dislike how our City Council goes along with the 8 vs. 3 votes on issues. Each district should be able to vote however they want and not pit the districts against each other. Why can't it be about what's best for San Antonio? These are local issues and it shouldn't be a republican or a democrat thing. This has got to stop because we're not doing what's in the best interest for our city. This is why we have a North vs. South side divide. This is the reason I will not be voting for Briones. He's keeps mentioning that he's a republican with a conservative background. What does being a republican have to do with being on the City Council?

You have your opinion and I have mine. My opinion is the go-getters end up moving to the northside, which has been redrawn from 90W, north and around to the other side of 35N, and the freeloaders hang around for the handouts. I'm not saying there aren't freeloaders on the nothside because I know quite a few. I bet you can guess their political affiliation.

[Merovee]

The RedNeckRick view is rather expected.

Yes, you have your view. We understand it. No doubt others share it.

To me it seems rather antiquated and more popular among an aging demographic overall.

Which leads me to this, which side of town has younger voters and which will have more voters coming of age? That there might be the future.

[txmusicgal]

Originally Posted by Bo

Briones is trying to "out" his main opponent, Nirenberg, as a Democrat, knowing that there are voters in that district who won't vote for a Democrat. AFAIK, Nirenberg hasn't claimed a party affiliation.

Since the city council and mayor elections are officially non-partisan, voters usually have to guess.

This is stupid that he thinks he needs to he "out" his main opponent. Did he forget that city council elections are suppose to be non-partisan? I do agree with you that it will help him get more votes, which is sad. Briones needs to forget about being Republican and do what's best for District 8.

Originally Posted by chud

I don't think anyone in Stone Oak cared one way or another until a few years ago when Sheila McNeil, who served on the City Council in District 2, said that 281 should be turned into a toll road because everyone on the north-side who lives near 281 "can afford it".
She claimed that everyone north of 1604 makes $200,000 to $300,000 a year, which of course is not true; most of us are just middle class working people, and didn't appreciate Ms. McNeil's sense of entitlement to our hard earned wages.

I remember it being posted on here when McNeil said that. She obviously doesn't know about the North side. Lots of people that live over here are middle class working families. Not everybody can afford to pay for a toll road everyday to get to work.