I thought i’d heard the local arrodissement populace had a lot of say over what happens in their neighborhood?
That was given as a reason Paris could reduce cars much faster than many cities , as Paris seems less dominated by the median suburban voter.
It’s shite if that 's not true. Paris seems so chill these days; at least in contrast to 20 years ago.
So what exactly are these elections for? Can they really go to an arondissement and remove all the pro-pedestrian stuff?
Is that in their power - if the residents don’t want it.
I’m far from an expert on current Parisian politics, but I can confirm that the mayor of Paris doesn’t preside over a lot of suburban area. Not sure for the power of the mayors of the individual arrondissements.
The (populated) area inside the red line is basically all high density so the people actually doing the voting should be rather in favour of fewer cars and better transit. The surrounding suburbs — where there are more carbrains — are different administrative units so they don’t really have a say in how central Paris is run.
In many areas (e.g. Toronto), these suburbs also vote for the mayor and tend to block progress. I think this is also part of how Paris can make rapid progress— the voters actually live in the city proper.
OP is asking about arrondissements, not suburbs. Arrondissements are a subdivision inside Paris, and they do have their own mayor. But they have less power, it’s more of an administrative position. 50 years ago they were selected by the state, not elected, then the position of mayor of Paris was created, so the position for the arrondissements is more of a leftover of shifting things around.
But your post does answer why Paris can actually make those changes, yes. And no, the arrondissement mayors don’t make those decisions.
Montreal’s arrodissement system/controls also greatly benefited it’s cycling growth.
Though the suburbs that are part of la ville de Montréal are gerenally less cars brained than suburbs that are not part of la vdm. So that is probably a big factor. That said, the biggest suburbs (and the ones directly north and south of la vdm) are putting big effort into their active and public transit; so maybe not.
AFAIK the arrondissement councils don’t have much power. The reason usually given why Paris was able to reduce cars much faster is that there aren’t really any suburbs in Paris, they’re all outside and therefore have no vote. And Paris voted for a mayor with the political will to actually kick out the cars. I’m not up to date on why they’re now shifting towards the right, might just be the general trend in the world.
I thought i’d heard the local arrodissement populace had a lot of say over what happens in their neighborhood?
That was given as a reason Paris could reduce cars much faster than many cities , as Paris seems less dominated by the median suburban voter.
It’s shite if that 's not true. Paris seems so chill these days; at least in contrast to 20 years ago.
So what exactly are these elections for? Can they really go to an arondissement and remove all the pro-pedestrian stuff? Is that in their power - if the residents don’t want it.
I’m far from an expert on current Parisian politics, but I can confirm that the mayor of Paris doesn’t preside over a lot of suburban area. Not sure for the power of the mayors of the individual arrondissements.
The (populated) area inside the red line is basically all high density so the people actually doing the voting should be rather in favour of fewer cars and better transit. The surrounding suburbs — where there are more carbrains — are different administrative units so they don’t really have a say in how central Paris is run.
In many areas (e.g. Toronto), these suburbs also vote for the mayor and tend to block progress. I think this is also part of how Paris can make rapid progress— the voters actually live in the city proper.
OP is asking about arrondissements, not suburbs. Arrondissements are a subdivision inside Paris, and they do have their own mayor. But they have less power, it’s more of an administrative position. 50 years ago they were selected by the state, not elected, then the position of mayor of Paris was created, so the position for the arrondissements is more of a leftover of shifting things around.
But your post does answer why Paris can actually make those changes, yes. And no, the arrondissement mayors don’t make those decisions.
Montreal’s arrodissement system/controls also greatly benefited it’s cycling growth.
Though the suburbs that are part of la ville de Montréal are gerenally less cars brained than suburbs that are not part of la vdm. So that is probably a big factor. That said, the biggest suburbs (and the ones directly north and south of la vdm) are putting big effort into their active and public transit; so maybe not.
AFAIK the arrondissement councils don’t have much power. The reason usually given why Paris was able to reduce cars much faster is that there aren’t really any suburbs in Paris, they’re all outside and therefore have no vote. And Paris voted for a mayor with the political will to actually kick out the cars. I’m not up to date on why they’re now shifting towards the right, might just be the general trend in the world.