Photos: Reservoir Park Spray Painted by Occupy Protesters

After fifteen arrests last week, Occupy St. Louis returned to St. Louis's Compton Hill Reservoir Park with spray paint. They spray painted public buildings and monuments with profanities and slogans.

Related articles

• Occupiers in St. Louis Mic Check During Otherwise Jovial St. Patrick's Day Parade (theblaze.com)
• #Occupy Protesters Vandalized Historic Building And Statue (mypetjawa.mu.nu)
• #Occupy Midwest Goons Close Conference - But Not Before Vandalizing Historic St. Louis Landmarks (thegatewaypundit.com)
• Occupy Protesters Clash With Police In South St. Louis (fox2now.com)
• 'Only Blood of the Rich Will Stop Occupy': St. Louis Hit with Frightening Pro-Occupy Graffiti (theblaze.com)
• Vandals Paint Occupy Slogans In City Park, On Officials' Home (fox2now.com)

Good Governance for the St. Louis Police

"In questions of power, then, let no more be said of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution." -- Thomas Jefferson

Last November the people of St. Louis voted to return control of the St. Louis Police Department to the city of St. Louis. Jamilah Nasheed and Speaker of the House Steve Tilley introduced HB 71 which would return local control by striking the existing state statute that establishes the Board of Police Commissioners in the city of St. Louis, but leaves intact the Board of Police Commissioners in Kansas City. The five member board which includes the mayor would be replaced by the structure defined in the St. Louis City Charter. Instead of the Police Chief answering to the board of commissioners, the chief would answer to the Police Commissioner who answers to the Director of Public Safety who reports to the Mayor.

This governing structure is inadequate for the city of St. Louis. First, the addition of two layers of beauracracy between the Mayor and Police Chief guarantees that the Mayor will never be held accountable for problems with the police department. Since those bureaucrats serve at the Mayor's discretion, they are easily scapegoated and dismissed in the event of bad press. Second, eliminating the board would politicize the police department. The state controled police board helps to ward off the political influence exerted by the city's aldermen.

Now I want to contrast this with the core argument put forth by the other side:

If one thinks the people of St Louis City can be trusted with their own PD then they should be sufficient oversight. If one believes that the people of St Louis City can't be trusted with oversight of their own PD, then what oversight would work?

I've seen that repeatedly from United for Missouri. They're implying that you must not trust the voters of St. Louis if you do not support HB 71. The irony is that supporters of the bill, like United for Missouri, have repeatedly shown that they do not trust St. Louis voters. First, they did this by circumscribing with statute the police pension fund. Apparently, United for Missouri does not trust the voters of St. Louis and their elected Alderman, like Quincy Troupe, with the pension fund. This past Thursday, an amendment was added to the bill making it a felony for police officers to make arrests at gun shows if the officer is in plain clothes. The purpose is to prevent the sort of stings that anti-gun zealots like Mayor Bloomberg in NYC have tried, but again this amendment demonstrates that supporters of HB 71 do not trust the voters of St. Louis and their duly elected Mayor.

In the previous paragraph I am poking fun at United for Missouri because I know that they do trust the voters of St. Louis; however, they temper that trust with legislation designed to foster good governance. This is an implicit indication on their part that the state does have an obligation to define good public institutions. This principal is also implied in Article 4 Section 4 of the US Constitution which guarantees a republican form of government to the states.

My chief complaint about HB 71 is that it fails to do that. It fails to define a reasonable path to local control and merely removes the board of police commissioners causing control to revert to the city charter (see my recommendation at the end of this post). The resulting mess will take years to sort out (for instance, do the St. Louis Airport Police get folded into the St. Louis city police force). It also creates lengthy bureaucratic hierarchies that prevent elected officials from being held accountable.

Related articles

• St. Louis City's PD in the Balance (24thstate.com)
• City Control and Residency (24thstate.com)
• Missouri House OKs local control for St. Louis police (stltoday.com)

The St. Louis Police Pension Fund: A Model for the Nation

There's a battle brewing in Jefferson City over "local control" of the St. Louis Police Department. It's a local issue that is always played out at the state level because of the history of St. Louis. In 1861, the state government seized control of the police forces in both St. Louis and Kansas City out of fear that those police would be used by the union against confederate interests.

The fear today comes from St. Louis policemen that worry that their pension will be looted by city hall. Those fears are justified given that city government has tried desperately to cut corners on the firefighters pension and, as the video above illustrates, at least one Alderman has designs on the police pension fund. The city is trying to strong-arm local control through in Jefferson City.

While that battle is being fought, the news story that isn't getting any play is the strength of the St. Louis Police Pension Fund. Day after day we hear about the problems of public employee pensions, but here's an example of a fund that has been run well. The fact that city government is walled off from the pension by the state is a strong argument for leaving the current oversight structure in place.

Arrested for Failure to Waive 4th Amendment Rights

One of the most influential books I've ever read is David Brin's The Transparent Society. It was written in the late 1990's and foresaw situations like the one captured in the video above of Benton County deputy Dana Winn and homeowner John Lewis. As a result of that video, deputy Winn is under investigation. Lewis recorded his own unlawful arrest with a hidden camera:

Lewis, who doesn't trust cops, has various cameras hidden around his home, including a small camera inside his sunglasses.

Lewis told Winn the man he was looking for didn't live there anymore. Lewis kept his answers short and abrupt, which infuriated Winn.

And Lewis has a strong case because his arrest appears to have been for not co-operating:

Winn asked to search the home but was denied because he didn't have a search warrant. Lewis was arrested a short time later for obstructing government operations.

In effect, deputy Winn arrested Lewis for failure to waiving his Fourth Amendment rights when asked to do so.

'nother Warrant, 'nother Arrest

Over in Columbia, MO, a police swat team executes a search warrant and the family pet. A few months ago I heard someone with Campaign for Liberty discuss the militarization of America's police forces: "when the uniforms go from blue to black, that's a leading indicator." I honestly can't recall the last time I saw a police officer in blue and if the video above is representative, that's a lot of police to serve a warrant.

Interpol: Our New Police State

Government should exist to protect the freedoms of the individuals whom it serves.
— Sheriff Richard Mack

NoisyRoom.net: Of Executive Orders and Trojan Horses [emphasis added]:

Yesterday, it was brought to my attention by Pierre Legrand that President Obama signed an Executive Order on December 17th that no one and I mean no one, reported on. Cue the crickets… As horrifying as the health care legislation is and I personally believe it is worthy of revolt, this Executive Order has the potential to be monstrous.
. . .
This now says that Interpol is no longer subject to the Freedom of Information Act. Their premises or staff can no longer be searched either. Their files are not subject to legal subpoena or discovery. Our government could just hand documents and files over to Interpol and Americans would no longer have access to them. Interpol can legally keep files now on all citizens of the US with no right to redress.

Perhaps some comfort can be found in Article 1 Section 4 of Missouri's Constitution (Independence of Missouri) [emphasis added]:

Section 4. That Missouri is a free and independent state, subject only to the Constitution of the United States; that all proposed amendments to the Constitution of the United States qualifying or affecting the individual liberties of the people or which in any wise may impair the right of local self-government belonging to the people of this state, should be submitted to conventions of the people.