“font-family: Verdana; font-size: 9pt;”>Only three parties were involved in deciding how to write up the ballot initiative for local control – an initiative that would transfer control of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department from the State of Missouri to the City of St. Louis – Jeff Roorda of the St. Louis Police Officers Association said at the Feb. 14 Board of Alderman public safety committee meeting.
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>Sitting at that cloistered table were Mayor Francis G. Slay’s office, the POA and A Safer Missouri, a group funded by Rex Sinquefield, the billionaire and conservative policy activist. The language they created will appear on the November 2012 ballot if the signature-gathering effort funded by Sinquefield succeeds.
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>Roorda told St. Louis aldermen that the POA got almost everything they were asking for in the initiative for local control – an issue the association has adamantly opposed for more than 20 years.
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>“We were surprised at often how we said ‘yes’ and how often the mayor’s office said ‘yes’ in the process,” Roorda said. “I know this is a prickly subject for you folks at the Board of Aldermen because you weren’t directly involved in that. In hindsight, that probably was a bad decision.”
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>Community organizations and the Board of Aldermen – who have been fighting for local control for years – were not at the deal table for the ballot language. And the initiative contains language that takes away power from the board and community, testifiers told the public safety committee, which is chaired by Alderman Greg Carter.
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>“A number of major stakeholders were left out of this discussion before this thing was pushed forward,” said Alderman Terry Kennedy. “And now it’s out there to the people.”
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>The American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri (ACLU-EM) and the Coalition Against Police Crimes and Repression (CAPCR) testified that they will fight the ballot initiative, though both groups have long pushed for local control.
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>This ballot initiative, they claim, would make it more difficult for the public to access records on police who are under investigation for wrongdoing and to establish a civilian review board.
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>John Chasnoff, an ACLU-EM and longtime CAPCR activist, read the language that hinders this authority: “The civil service commission of the city may adopt rules and regulations appropriate for the unique operation of a police department. Such rules and regulations shall reserve exclusive authority over the disciplinary process and procedures affecting commissioned officers to the civil service commission.”
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>The ACLU-EM has filed a lawsuit challenging the initiative because the ballot summary approved by the Missouri Secretary of State fails to inform voters of this provision, as well as another that creates an exemption to the Missouri Sunshine Law, which protects citizens’ rights to public records.
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>In fine print not summarized for the voter, the initiative states that records prepared for disciplinary purposes shall be “confidential, closed records available solely to the civil service commission.”
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>A recent analysis by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch found that “font-size: 9pt; font-family: Verdana;” lang=”EN” xml:lang=”EN”>in the five years ending in 2010, St. Louis officers fired up to three times more often, per reported violent crime, than those protecting other, similar-sized populations. From January 2007 through Sept. 30, 2011, the department cleared more than 96 percent of the shootings by officers.
“font-size: 9pt; font-family: Verdana;” lang=”EN” xml:lang=”EN”>The police department also does not always readily provide public records regarding investigations on police officers’ wrongdoings. The ACLU-EM filed and won a lawsuit against the department regarding this issue.
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>“We’ve always been proponents of having St. Louis control its own police department,” said ACLU-EM Executive Director Brenda Jones, “but we shouldn’t have to sacrifice open records, open government or independent civilian review of police to get it. That’s what this initiative will do if it passes, and the summary does not make that clear to voters.”
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>The committee meeting lasted for three hours. At the beginning, Alderman Craig Schmid said he thought the city would be able to establish a civilian review board under the initiative. After hearing Chasnoff read the language, Schmid said, “I agree with you. It seems on its face that the language is restrictive of any civilian review board.”
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>Roorda said repeatedly throughout the meeting that the association was opposed to a civilian review board. He also called the issues the ACLU and CAPCR were raising “divisive” and a “distraction.”
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>“Civilian review boards have been used to second-guess police officers and to stir up dissention between the community and the police,” he said. “That’s not what we are looking for.”
“font-size: 9.0pt; font-family: Verdana;”>Police Chief Daniel Isom disagreed with Roorda. “We can stand the scrutiny of a civilian review board,” Isom said. “I think what it does is gives us more legitimacy.”
