The Madison City Council has 20 members, all part-time and elected to their seats. Is that too many? Too little? Just right, Goldilocks style?
It’s been up for debate in the city for years. While a city task force recommended reducing the size from 20 to 10 council members and making them full-time positions, voters said in a 2021 advisory referendum that they liked the makeup of the council the way it was.
Earlier this month, Council President Regina Vidaver revived the debate in the city’s Executive Committee, floating the idea of reducing the size to 15 members. On the City Cast Madison podcast today, executive producer Hayley Sperling and producer Jade Iseri-Ramos hash out the pros and the cons of each side, and whether anything is ever really going to change.
I put the call out to newsletter readers for your thoughts on city council size, and you responded! It’s clearly an issue that sparks a lot of different perspectives. Thanks to everyone who wrote in, and drop me a line with your thoughts at madison@citycast.fm.
“We should have less. 20 is too many.” – Brenda F.
“Wisely, Madison voters rejected the idea of full-time alder positions in 2021, the last time the idea was floated.There are already too many special interest groups meddling in the alder election process: developers, realtors, and partisan political parties to name a few. Career alder positions would offer more incentives for individuals and groups to try to capture and hold them.
We saw what happened to the State Legislature when the positions became full time with a generous benefits package. Elected officials and political parties became entrenched and the legislature became more dysfunctional. Being an alder should remain a side gig, not a path to full-time employment.” – Ginny W.
“I like the idea of an odd number to avoid ties, and redistributing salaries is appealing (how much do alders make, anyways?) but generally speaking, more representatives translates to better representation. Maybe cut it to 19 for now? Ideally there would be rules in place scaling the number of alders to the population of the city.” – Cole S.
“ [I] like [the] 15 [alders] idea. Larger districts means they each have to support a broader and more diverse base.” – Tom M.
“Yes I think we should go down to 15 alders that are full time. A city of our size needs full time staff to focus on issues - and the position should pay well enough that they can dedicate their time to our needs.” – Brady S.
“Should be kept at 20. Our population keeps growing & thus each alder is representing more & more people. Plus, the mayor SHOULD vote the tie breaker!! It's their job!! It also gives us a perspective on s/he feels about that issue.” – Cathi W.
