KCRag Forum

Councilman Robinson has introduced an ordinance to: "Directing the City Manager to conduct an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages to the City if local control of the Kansas City Police Department were returned to the City."

http://cityclerk.kcmo.org/LiveWeb/Docum ... VehNgBrQWh

Finally.

Good news. One step in solving a huge local crime issue.

Is there a statistical link between local PD control and crime rates?

Weren't KC and STL the only two cities in the nation? Would be some pretty skewed stats.

IMO the reason to get local control is to restore financial accountability.

^Yes. IIRC none of the recommendations from that audit the city did a few years ago were ever implemented.

edit: verb tense consistency

"restore financial accountability"

LOL that's a nice "thought" there but it takes a hell of a lot longer to get out of mess then it does to get into one.

Sure, maybe. But the only way we'll know for certain is by restoring local control.

There is more accountability overall on the local level than the state level.

Council Close to Creating Panel to Study Local Police Control and Gun Violence

The Kansas City Council approved a resolution that will establish a panel to consider the pros and cons of returning local control of the police department to the city, and to study the effectiveness of current gun violence programs.

The resolution sponsored by Councilwoman Melissa Robinson was approved on a 9-3 vote.
...

https://cityscenekc.com/council-close-t ... -violence/

Sounds like a good idea but it’s a horrible idea. Our mayor and council cower at the political power of the public safety unions. Local control would only make things worse.

cdm2p wrote: ↑Sun Mar 01, 2020 10:18 am Sounds like a good idea but it’s a horrible idea. Our mayor and council cower at the political power of the public safety unions. Local control would only make things worse.

Doesn't state control date back to the Pendergast era when KC's police department was corrupt? Seems archaic.

KCFD passed a big tax grab that will allow KCPD to continue raiding the general fund with no recourse. Low double-digit turnout. Thanks, Gov!

The campaign against this was damn near invisible to a normal person. Was there even one? Blame also falls on the governor for resisting mail in voting and the council for making it yet another election people had to go to in a presidential year. They knew what they were doing.

How does a KCFD tax influence what KCPD gets to do?

Blame for this goes to the council. They slid this onto the ballot with no public discussion or outreach.

horizons82 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 02, 2020 9:38 pm
How does a KCFD tax influence what KCPD gets to do?

If KCFD needs less of the general fund because they have another sole purpose tax, KCPD will sop up what KCFD no longer uses.

But in reality, both their budgets will continue to devour the general fund unabated because neither has ever been held accountable for how they spend money they receive.

horizons82 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 02, 2020 9:38 pm The campaign against this was damn near invisible to a normal person. Was there even one? Blame also falls on the governor for resisting mail in voting and the council for making it yet another election people had to go to in a presidential year. They knew what they were doing.

How does a KCFD tax influence what KCPD gets to do?

How was the council making this another election? This was generanl municipal election, not a city election. Just in Clay County there were 32 municipalities/districts with a ballot item yesterday.

The problem wasn't that the city put it on the ballot, it's that no other notable items were on the ballot south of the river.

There's arguments for having less elections each year, but you can't blame the city for choosing a legitimate election date

flyingember wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:58 am
How was the council making this another election? This was generanl municipal election, not a city election. Just in Clay County there were 32 municipalities/districts with a ballot item yesterday.

The majority of citizens live south of the river which you yourself answer when you say:

flyingember wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:58 am The problem wasn't that the city put it on the ballot, it's that no other notable items were on the ballot south of the river.

We can pine for people to be hyper engaged in all levels of government. Or we can live in reality. Reality is people kinda pay attention to federal elections, but barely pay attention to local elections. If a sales tax question is essentially the only debate being had, you’re going to need strong organization to bring people out. Northland and the Fire union does that for the pro side, what exactly would drive someone to get out and vote against? Those of us here know why, but we’re the exception not the rule.

flyingember wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:58 am There's arguments for having less elections each year, but you can't blame the city for choosing a legitimate election date

Sure any Tuesday is a legitimate election date. However, we already had a spring presidential primary election, will have an August primary, and will have a fall general. The city could have put it in the fall when there would have been the historically largest turnout. Even the August primary could have been argued. They put it as a one off because they figured a low turnout would benefit the vote. It’s the same tactic the state is taking with the Medicaid expansion happening in August instead of November. They have a desired outcome and use rough historical data on turnout to increase their odds.