What is Irene Smith talking about?

by dave | Tue, 01/13/2009 - 5:06pm

Fix says Irene Smith wants Nixon to remove Police Board.

Under Section 84-030 RSMo, police commissioners are appointed to terms, do not serve at pleasure of governor.

Section 84-080 RSMo  says a police commissioner cannot hold another appointed/elected office or seek nomination for public office during tenure and that governor can remove for official misconduct.

Section 576-040 RSMo defines official misconduct.  Most of the definitions are office specific. The only two that are generic relate to employment discrimination and receiving fees/rewards for execution of duties beyond what is due.

Comments

by St. Louis Listener | Wed, 01/14/2009 - 4:28pm

Howard, change has to start somewhere. The first step is alway criticized as an oppostition to change.
Just watch for the roll out. Talk is cheap but actions speak louder than words.

by The_Civic_League | Wed, 01/14/2009 - 12:04pm

As mayor, will she urge the 28 clowns that call themselves the Board of Aldermen to resign? Hope so.

by healthy dissati... | Wed, 01/14/2009 - 9:27am

Howard,

I find it curious that you lack an appreciation for the power of the Governor's bully pulpit. Members of the police board want to curry favor with the powers that be. I believe, that if Nixon asked for their resignations, they would step down in deference to the Governor's desire to put his new team in place.

Perhaps you are not familiar with how transitions of power typically work.

by Howard | Wed, 01/14/2009 - 1:31pm

Resignation doesn't accomplish anything other than give a small percentage of people meaningless instant gratification.

Alert the media. Stand in front of cameras. Rah, rah. We won. We got rid of them. Pats on the back. High fives. Curse the mayor.

Then on to outrage about the next board selected. Curse the mayor.

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

Stopping the cycle requires a complete change, changing the law. The focus should be on Lege. The bully pulpit of the governor's office should not be wasted on dumping the current board and all the controversy that would follow. The bully pulpit would best serve us by Nixon convincing the Lege to give us back control. Over time, Nixon can, I believe, with the articulate voice of a strong mayor who has had a working relationship with the Lege (not like that Harmon fellow before him who abdicated the job) and city legislators doing some heavy lifting, talk the urban delegation on the west side of the state and the outstate good old boys and gals into making this happen. He can't do it if he's mired in the controversy of appointment confirmations for the entire board.

I can see it now. Board resigns. Governor nominates new board. Confirmation hearings and votes are put into motion. Camera whores object to all or some of the nominations.

That's not the scenario for convincing the Lege that our cause is just and we are mature enough to run our own police department.

The controversies involving the police department make for us a righteous argument in favor of local control and local accountability. Lege, look at the history of the board. See this, this, this, this, and this. The system is broken. It's not about individuals. It's not about this board. It's about a system that has failed us for a very long time. Fix the freakin system.

That's the approach that should be taken. It can't be done without getting the governor behind it. The way to get Nixon behind this is not asking him to mire his first year in office with the chaos that would come from the police board resigning.

But, what do I know, so much of my insight on governors has been shaped by Benson DuBois and Otto Kerner.

If we aren't willing to pay a price for our values, then we should ask ourselves whether we truly believe in them at all.

by St. Louis Listener | Wed, 01/14/2009 - 1:21am

Dave, you should be ashamed of yourself. Read the article before you start posting. It makes you look bad and leaves alot of room to question your thought process.

by Howard | Wed, 01/14/2009 - 3:07am

As Dave pointed out, the governor's authority is limited to removing for cause. When a governor demands something, he or she better have authority to make it happen in the event the request/demand is ignored. The only way Nixon could ask the Police Board to step aside without looking goofy is if he had cause to remove them. What's his next move after they ignore him? Threaten them with a really stern talking to?

Resign or remove, it doesn't make any difference. Until the law is changed and control returned to the people who pay the bills, the situation will stink.

If we aren't willing to pay a price for our values, then we should ask ourselves whether we truly believe in them at all.

by healthy dissati... | Wed, 01/14/2009 - 12:25am

DD:

Perhaps you should read beyond the Post's misleading headline:

"But today, Smith issued a release congratulating Gov. Jay Nixon on his inauguration yesterday — and asking, for one of his first official acts, to seek the RESIGNATION [emphasis added] of the four members of the St. Louis Police Board appointed by his predecessor, Matt Blunt."

Your intentionally misleading anti-Smith posting reveals that you are nothing more than a mouthpiece for the powers that be. (Namely, the Slay administration.)

I would expect no less from you, however, as your weekly "insights" in the Business Journal leave much to be desired. Could you please elaborate on exactly when "historic preservationists" became a monolithic voting bloc in St. Louis mayoral elections?

-Pro-Smith, not just Anti-Slay

by AJ | Wed, 01/14/2009 - 7:35pm

Considering the Dave helped break the story about a pro-Slay group paying for good press in the Daily Whirl, I would hardly consider him "a mouthpiece for the powers that be." However, I do think this post could have been more careful about how it described Smith's actions.

by healthy dissati... | Wed, 01/14/2009 - 12:17am

Dave,

From my understanding of your background, you are not an attorney and know not of what you write. Smith, in expressing her strong desire to see accountability for the Police Board's failures to provide meaningful oversight of departmental operations, asked Governor Nixon to join her in demanding the RESIGNATIONS of the entire Police Board.

Explain to your readership how a board of five men (four of whom were appointed by Governor Blunt) overseeing the operations of a department whose expenditures comprise 1/3 of the City's annual budget serves the public interest. The Police Department needs a Police Board whose membership is representative of the City's demographics (52% female) and representative of the community's desire to restore accountability and trust in the Police Department.

Remember, two members of the current board (Goodson and Bommarito) voted against Chief Isom's gun buyback initiative. We need a Police Board that will support the new Chief by giving him the resources to fight crime. A new Police Board is only an interim measure until we regain local control of the department.

-For Irene in 2005 and excited to see her bring a new vision to Room 200 in 2009

by Howard | Tue, 01/13/2009 - 6:18pm

What is sad is that the daily paper of record published an absurd item like that.

If we aren't willing to pay a price for our values, then we should ask ourselves whether we truly believe in them at all.