By Antonio D. French
Filed Friday, March 3 at 8:36 AM
The St. Louis Board of Aldermen voted this morning to take a bill creating a civilian review board off the informal calendar. The bill, introduced by Ald. Terry Kennedy and co-sponsored by all of the board's 11 other black aldermen, had been on the informal calendar since Jan. 27.
A floor substitute was offered today to address many of the concerns of Mayor Francis Slay, some St. Louis police officers, and several southside aldermen. The substitute did away with the provision calling for elected members, a point that leaders of the Coalition Against Police Crimes and Repression said earlier was absolutely necessary.
The new version of BB69 calls for the creation of 7 districts across the city, each composed of 4 wards. The four aldermen would submit to the mayor's office 1-4 names. The mayor would then pass one of those names on to the board of aldermen for confirmation.
Discussion on the substitute bill became heated. "Civilian Review is not an indictment of the police," said Kennedy. This bill is the culmination of nearly a hundred years of effort, he said, pointing out that the Urban League and NAACP began pushing for civilian review in 1917 following the infamous East St. Louis Riots.
Alderman Steve Conway (8th Ward) attacked the backers of the floor substitute for not including some members in the negotiations of this compromise. He said he and others had just received the new language in the last hour.
Conway said that a civilian review board could "make life miserable for each and every police officer." This bill is "the soft version of the anti-police bill," he said.
"We just want to punish police officers," is how Conway described the position of some supporters of a civilian review board. Conway said the proponents of this bill don't like police officers.
"This is a bad bill. It wasn't done in an open fashion," said Conway.
Still Developing...
1 Comments:
This is the City administration that had the police roust the homeless out of downtown for the Fair St. Louis over a year ago. Then it seemed everyone lied about what happened.
I really question the mayor having control of who sits on the board.
I don't hate every police officer, but I have gripes against most of the ones I come into contact with. I know I don't want that job, so I try to cut them a little slack. But they need to do their jobs (even when there isn't a violent crime involved), ignore the color and economic status of the people who are breaking the law, and be accountable when they screw up.
I can see some accidental shootings happening every now and then. I think if my life were in danger, I would do what I had to do to save my life. I can forgive accidents. I just can't stand coverups and anything that smells of a coverup. It makes me think everyone is on the take.
The mayor instills nothing remotely resembling confidence in his judgement, so why should I trust him to select individuals who will do more than his will? Same with the governor. They seem too ready to be nice to the rich guys and don't give a shit about anyone who doesn't contribute heavily to their campaigns.
I can see them siding with the officers until the facts are collected. But all I want is to see the facts collected by an unbiased group of respected individuals. I think we voters should be trusted to select those people. If the mayor thinks we aren't capable, he's just calling us all a bunch of ignorant bums.
1:08 PM, March 03, 2006
Post a Comment
<< Home