Less than two weeks ago, Mayor Quinton Lucas took a knee, along with Police Chief Rick Smith, in memory of George Floyd.
A week ago today, Lucas told a big crowd of protestors at City Hall he was on their side and supported their list of demands, including local control of KCPD.
Wednesday, in a “Dear-Members-of-the-Kansas-City-Police-Department” letter, he praised officers “for the tough work you perform each day.”
“I thank you for your work, your patience in trying times and your commitment to our city,” he said.
When I first read the letter, hurriedly, I thought it was a love letter, that Lucas was completely capitulating to the police union, which supported him in last year’s mayoral race — just as he capitulated recently to the fire fighters’ union on its quarter-cent sales-tax proposal. (The fire union also supported him over opponent Jolie Justus last year.)
But as I read the two-page letter more closely last night, I saw hints that Lucas might be paving the way to pick up the leadership mantle in pushing for local control. Intertwined with his praise for police officers (and he seemed to be talking directly to them), he alluded four times to the possibility of substantive change.
Lucas at last Friday’s protest outside City Hall (Dan Cohen/KSHB TV)
Here are three examples; read these words closely…
:: I also want to make clear that as we evaluate policies in the future, any critiques I share — and I would hope other electeds may voice — relate not to the tough work you perform each day, but instead to political choices made by myself and my predecessors in some cases long before you swore an oath.
:: Those of us in politics and leadership have much work ahead to address public sentiment, as is our job in this system.
:: We will discuss policing a great deal over the months and years ahead.
When Lucas became mayor last August, he had a reputation for equivocating and being unduly influenced by the last people he spoke to on controversial issues.
In office for less than a year now, he has yet to prove he has the guts to put the public interest above political considerations.
For example, during the campaign, he said he would take a tougher approach on tax incentives and that he did not favor any new taxes.
But four months after being sworn in, he caved to developers and voted in favor of a controversial, $35-million incentive package to help Waddell & Reed to move more than 900 jobs to a new building at 14th and Baltimore.
Then, two weeks ago, he came out in favor the the Fire Department sales-tax increase, one of the most brazen tax ambushes any City Council has pulled off in recent history. (The ordinance authorizing the election was proposed one Thursday and passed the next, with just one public hearing that few members of the public knew about.)
…So, here we are again, and this time with the thorniest issue that has surfaced in the Lucas administration: how to get a go-it-alone police department out from under state control.
As I’ve said several times, local control can only be achieved in one of three ways: 1) a successful, statewide initiative petition followed by a statewide vote; 2) a state law authorizing a statewide vote; 3) a state law ceding control to the city.
Succeeding on any of those options is going to require, among other things, an unrelenting push by the mayor, strident insistence from organizations like Freedom Inc. and the Urban League of Kansas City, and a vigorous editorial campaign by The Kansas City Star.
It will meet with stiff opposition from several vested interests: the Republican- and rural-dominated General Assembly; Gov. “Farmer Mike” Parson; the Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge 99; probably Local 42 of the fire fighters union, which often runs interference for its law enforcement counterpart; and possibly the Board of Police Commissioners, appointed by the governor.
**
Is Quinton Lucas up to this challenge? Does he have the intestinal fortitude to stand up to the two most important unions that supported him? In his letter to police officers, is he sticking a finger up to see how the wind is blowing, or is he laying the groundwork for the most important initiative he could take as long as he is mayor?
Those are open and nagging questions. I think he is certainly the best person to have in the mayor’s office now, with race relations and racial injustice at the hands of law enforcement having thrust itself head, shoulders and chest above all other issues.
Yet Lucas has a lot to prove, and not just to me.
Another skeptic is my friend Clinton Adams Jr., perhaps the shrewdest and most unblinking City Hall analyst around.
Clinton Adams Jr.
In a series of text exchanges yesterday, Adams called Lucas “feckless” and “duplicitous” and said that while he was “a better option than Jolie (Justus), he’s no Kay Barnes or Emanuel Cleaver.”
Adams, former attorney for Freedom Inc., went on to say…
Some people find the pandering to police offensive. He’s waffling on local control. The F.O.P. supported him because privately he is opposed or will not fight for it…He can’t be in both camps. Rank and file officers (who comprise the largest of two police unions) are the ones who abuse and brutalize; who harass and stop for driving while black; who use excessive force. It’s generally not commanders.
Now, there’s a tough and clear-eyed assessment; there’s a challenge laid down.
On June 2, in the wake of Lucas’ role as a peacemaker in the protests, a Kansas City Star editorial was headlined, “KC Mayor Quinton Lucas has met this moment. Will Police Chief Rick Smith join him there?”
I think a bigger question by far is, “Does Quinton Lucas have the heart to lead an all-out battle against the General Assembly and the governor over control the Kansas City Police Department?”
This is his best opportunity to take a stand on behalf of the public at the risk of losing the support of the F.O.P. and maybe Local 42. He’s less than a year into his first term. If he fails, all could be forgiven by 2023. If he wins, he never loses an election in Kansas City or Jackson County, and he could even go on to compete for a statewide office.
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
Jim, why do you think the members of the Police Board would oppose local control? You and I know many of them. I think they see themselves as public servants, not power hungry or narrow minded.
You may well be right, Cheryl. I wrote reflexively there. I even made a case the other day for why a board majority might support asking Chief Rick Smith to resign. On the other hand, voting to change chiefs would be much easier for the board than voting to eliminate itself. How and if the board might come down on local control is one of the elements that make this such a challenging proposition.
At any rate, I’m going to change the wording there, leaving it open. Thanks for the keen observation.
Today’s KC Star has a front-page story by Glenn Rice about Lucas’ controversial letter, and editorial board member Dave Helling wrote a strong editorial.
The editorial concluded with this paragraph…
“So there is work to do. Building a better police department will be difficult, but it will almost be impossible without a clear and consistent agenda from the mayor. His letter is a distraction from that task, and a setback for reform efforts.”
On February 20, the City Council adopted a resolution creating the Public Safety Study Group. Its charge was to make recommendations on local control and gun violence. The deadline established for the PSSG to complete its report is Sept. 30.
It wasn’t until May 13 that Mayor Lucas appointed the five members of the PSSG. The resolution mandated that the group hold its first meeting within thirty days of its appointment. The thirty days ran out today. No meeting has occurred.
Given the slow pace with which the PSSG is getting underway, I’m a little confused as to how much of a sense of urgency there is in addressing the issue of local control. At a minimum, I wish they would go ahead and hold their first meeting. Between now and Sept. 30 isn’t a lot of time to study issues as challenging as local control and gun violence.
I think former Chief Jim Corwin is chairman of the study group…If that’s the case, just how deeply do you think this group is going to study local control? What a joke…
Well, Mayor Lucas is the one who made Corwin the chair. So, if you are right that Corwin’s appointment made the possibility of a serious study of local control a joke, I guess that means Mayor Lucas doesn’t support local control.
The statement “We will discuss policing a great deal over the months and years ahead” would appear to be coming from a man who isn’t in any real hurry to carry the banner and do battle with the powers that be. I didn’t hear him use the word “days” as in “Let’s get this conversation started!” No, I think Lucas will remain on the fence as long as he can. And I’m not going to be holding my breath waiting for substantial change to occur in Kansas City or any number of other places in this country. But at least the mayor didn’t say, “We need to dismantle the Police Department right now!”
Good observations, Rick. The coalition that is pushing for local control and Rick Smith to resign — that is, the Urban League, the NAACP local branch and MORE2 — understands the problem with “defunding” the police, and they wisely are not advocating that.