I hope Mayor Quinton Lucas’ proposal Thursday for a preferential election on local control of the Kansas City Police Department didn’t get any of you thinking he might be trying his hand at leadership.
If anyone fell for that misdirection play, I’m here to set the record straight: What he wants to do is lead from behind.
In proposing a preferential vote on the November ballot, Lucas said people have been talking about local control for decades and that they are “tired of waiting.”
Well, he’s sure right about the tired-of-waiting part: Many of us are also tired of waiting for HIM to pick up the flag and get out front.
Lucas says if voters indicate in November they want local control, he will make it a legislative priority with the General Assembly next year.
Well, big deal. That’s just kicking the ball diagonally, instead of straight ahead.
Gwen Grant, president of the Urban League of Greater Kansas City, put the matter of a preferential election in perspective when she told The Star…
“Quite frankly, the ballot language in this ordinance is superfluous. A referendum to determine the alternative governance structure would make better sense.”
**
I assure you Lucas doesn’t want to pick up the flag and be at the point of any wedge that might develop regarding local control. He wants to be tucked back inside, where he thinks it’s much safer politically and where he can occasionally holler, “I’m still here! Still with you!”
The thing about a wedge is it doesn’t develop without someone very strong out front, someone whom the voters overwhelmingly approve of, which is where Lucas finds himself after last year’s mayoral election.
He soundly defeated the favorite, Jolie Justus (maybe he’s still surprised about that), and he has just barely sipped from the deep trough of goodwill that almost every elected official starts out with.
So, this is the time to lead. This is the time to go to Local 99 of the F.O.P., which supported him in the 2019 election, and say: “Hey, I know I told you before the election I was against local control, but, as you can see, the public mood has suddenly and decisively changed. People are demanding a change, and this might be our best, real chance to get local control. The way things are, I’ve got to go back on my word to you and look out for the best interests of the city as a whole. Sorry.”
That’s what a strong leader would do. But as I’ve said before, I doubt Lucas has the stomach to get out front. He’s already thinking about a second term and how in the world he he would get it if Local 99 and its even stronger counterpart, Local 42 of the fire fighters union, turned on him.
**
But here’s the rub. The public has been watching closely as police overreacted during the recent protests and to the predictable performance of hidebound police Chief Rick Smith. And I feel sure a large majority didn’t like what they saw and now want genuine reform.
For the first time, maybe ever, I think many people realize what folly it is to have local taxpayers picking up the bill for police department operations while the department is effectively being run out of Jefferson City. Jefferson City…part-time home to the biggest troglodytes the state has to offer!
And so, if Lucas continues to equivocate, continues to try to play both sides (as I feel sure he will), a majority of voters will sooner or later recognize him as just a smooth talker with little conviction or substance. And when voters conclude a politician is weak, they often turn their backs. In the long run, his equivocating and demurring could cost him a second term, or a chance for higher office down the road.
…For all his strutting and chest swelling, former Mayor Sly James never exhibited signs of weakness. I didn’t agree with how he did it, but he was up to the biggest challenge of his two terms: getting a new KCI under construction.
Quinton Lucas is now confronted with what may well be the biggest challenge of his time as mayor, and what is he doing? Running for cover behind an election that carries no real weight and won’t move the needle an inch in Jefferson City.
**
Here’s the proposed ballot language for what would be Question 1 on the Nov. 3 ballot, if a City Council majority approves…
Shall the City of Kansas City, Missouri establish as a City legislative priority in the Missouri General Assembly the pursuit of a state legislative or referendum action that will return Mayor and City Council-led local control to the Kansas City Police Department rather than the current control of the Kansas City Police Department by a committee comprised of four members appointed by the Governor of Missouri and an additional position held by the Mayor of Kansas City?
YES [ ] NO [ ]
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
I favor local control. But the argument for the status quo is that the Gov appoints local people to be on the Commission, so, they say, it is not run out of Jeff City. How do we respond effectively?
Doesn’t governmental responsibility always go back, ultimately, to the people whom the voters elected?
The four members of the Commission appointed by Parson are in no way accountable to the voters of Kansas City. On pivotal issues, they look eastward, not to City Hall across Oak Street for guidance. Parson can pick up the phone, call each of them and say, “No on local control” or “No, don’t fire the chief,” and they follow his lead or find themselves replaced.
By extension, the police board is responsible for Kansas City’s soaring murder rate, which is on a pace to hit 180 for the year. But does the board fear repercussion from Kansas City voters? Not in the least. They are under no pressure from anyone in Kansas City to come up with a plan, or even to push Rick Smith to come up with a plan to counter it.
That’s why we see Lucas putting on himself the responsibility for coming up with a plan to reduce violence. In a guest commentary in The Star in January he said, “We…can’t waste time yelling at officials in Jefferson City or Washington, blaming our own inaction on them. Instead, my office continues to work as quickly, strategically and creatively as possible to curb this epidemic.”
But his hands are tied. Smith, the Commission and the officers can basically ignore him because he’s outnumbered 4 to 1.
If more Kansas Citians understood this situation and understood that Parson’s four appointees are responsible for the high murder rate, more of them would say, “This isn’t right; let’s get the accountability right here in our city.”
Jim, I am beginning to see your position on Mayor Lucas not taking the lead because of his commitment to police union. However, someone can start a referendum petition drive and by-pass the legislature. Of course it takes a state-wide vote. St. Louis was able to achieve local control. Local control will not solve all the problems of the police department, but it does not make any sense anymore for the board to mandate the city to budget $ for the department. The Mayor can argue for more, but that’s all he can do.
I am baffled by your statement that the police board is responsible for the high murder rate in Kansas City. There are gangs and other criminals committing these crimes that no police chief or board can control the situation and keep the killings from happening. Police shootings are a different matter of course.
What I said was the police board is responsible for the murder rate by extension, because it is they who are in charge of departmental policy. They could and should demand that the chief come up with a strategy for reducing violence; they haven’t. So far, the department has been strictly responsive; that’s the policy at this point.
If I had to write that earlier reply again, I’d put it more in the vein of the board being responsible for policy, with the current policy falling way short of adequately addressing the level of violence and murders in KC.
I have to disagree with you regarding the Mayor’s action to put it to a local vote. St. Louis did the same thing before going to the legislature to put it on the statewide ballot. If the residents of Kansas City support this (I think they do) and vote for local control, it will make it easier to get the issue on the ballot. Doing an initiative petition for a statewide issue would be daunting. Mayor Lucas is doing the right thing!
I didn’t know St. Louis held a local vote before they moved forward, Regina…That changes the complexion of things somewhat, but I still don’t know why Lucas is lurking back. The way Sly got voter approval for a new airport was by pushing hard for it and calling for a vote at a time when public surveys were showing strong disfavor. Either public sentiment changed fast or the surveys were off. Again, for me, it comes back to courage to get out front. A lot of people still don’t understand the nuances of state vs. local, and he’s the guy who should clarify and point the way.
I am strongly opposed to local control of our police department. I hope it remains the way it is. Who in their right mind would want our mayor and city council to be over them. Look at the way they run our city. In my opinion it is not run in the best interest of law abiding citizens. I am sure many people will disagree with me, but I have lived here since 1946. I have lived here with many different mayors and councils and I do not think we have the most competent leaders at the present time. I do not want them over the people that protect me.
I support Chief Smith totally. He is better than our last chief. Police can do the best they can, but NOONE can control and stop people from killing each other. If it were possible, someone would have stopped it by now. Too many variables involved. They have the most dangerous job in the city. I appreciate and thank them for all they do for all of us.