Ferguson Asks For Changes To Police Reform Plan, Saying Deal Would Bankrupt City

Ferguson mayor James Knowles III looks out at the crowd on Tuesday, Feb. 9, 2016, after the Ferguson city council voted to approve a modified consent decree with the United States Department of Justice during a meeti... Ferguson mayor James Knowles III looks out at the crowd on Tuesday, Feb. 9, 2016, after the Ferguson city council voted to approve a modified consent decree with the United States Department of Justice during a meeting in Ferguson, Mo. It is unclear if the Department of Justice will accept the modified version of the consent decree Ferguson passed. (David Carson/St. Louis Post-Dispatch via AP) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

FERGUSON, Mo. (AP) — The Ferguson City Council has asked the U.S. Department of Justice for seven changes to a deal to reform the city’s courts and policing systems, a move that drew swift criticism from both the department and many residents.

In a unanimous vote, the council on Tuesday night moved to amend the proposed settlement that the city had spent seven months negotiating with the DOJ. The consent decree is intended to correct problems identified in a federal investigation that followed the fatal shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown by a Ferguson police officer. The federal report noted unconstitutional and discriminatory practices across the police force and municipal court system.

Ferguson Mayor James Knowles III said Wednesday that the changes were deemed necessary after a detailed financial analysis showed just how expensive the original agreement would be — so expensive, Knowles said, that it could lead to dissolution of Ferguson.

“We’re not trying to reopen negotiations. We tried to tell them what the city council will agree to,” Knowles said. If the DOJ opts to sue Ferguson, “we’ll have to deal with that in court,” Knowles said.

Councilman Wesley Bell proposed the changes, several of which aim to reduce the cost of implementing the deal that officials worried could bankrupt the St. Louis suburb. The council signed off on the rest of the settlement, and Bell said he was confident the DOJ would agree to the changes.

“I don’t think there’s anything unreasonable,” Bell said.

But Vanita Gupta, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, voiced concern.

It “creates an unnecessary delay in the essential work to bring constitutional policing to the city, and marks an unfortunate outcome for concerned community members and Ferguson police officers,” Gupta said in a statement.

If the Justice Department doesn’t go along with the changes, a civil rights lawsuit is possible, potentially costing Ferguson millions of dollars in legal fees. Gupta didn’t specifically address whether a lawsuit would be filed but said the department would take “the necessary legal actions” to ensure Ferguson’s police and court practices comply with the Constitution and federal laws.

The council’s biggest change removes a requirement that police salaries be raised. City officials believe meeting that provision would also require fire department salaries to rise, potentially costing $1 million annually.

Another provision states that parts of the agreement won’t apply to any other governmental entity that might take over duties currently provided by Ferguson. That means, for example, that St. Louis County would not be beholden to the agreement if it takes over policing in Ferguson.

Knowles said St. Louis County police have already stated they would not consider taking over patrol in Ferguson if burdened with mandates of the consent agreement.

The council’s vote came at the end of an often-boisterous meeting that had been moved to the Ferguson Community Center because of the crowd of around 300. The vast majority of speakers supported the original agreement.

Karl Tricamo, 32, shouted out as the council approved the amended deal, wondering why it wasn’t announced until the end of the meeting.

“I don’t think the DOJ is going to go for this,” he said.

Ferguson has been under scrutiny since the killing of Brown, whose father stood quietly at the back of the meeting Tuesday night. The black, unarmed 18-year-old was fatally shot Aug. 9, 2014, by white Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson during a confrontation on a street. A St. Louis County grand jury declined to charge Wilson, who later resigned. He was cleared of wrongdoing by the Justice Department.

The shooting was a catalyst in the Black Lives Matter movement and sparked a national dialogue about police use of force.

The agreement requires hiring a monitor, instituting police diversity training, and buying software and hiring staff to analyze records on arrests, use of force and other police matters.

A city analysis performed in recent days determined the city’s cost would be up to $3.7 million for the first year alone, and $1.8 million to $3 million in each of the second and third years.

“We made extremely reasonable changes that make the agreement workable for the city of Ferguson,” Knowles said. “It has to be financially feasible. Once the financial analysis was done over and over again, the numbers we were talking about were unachievable.”

Some who spoke at the meeting agreed that the cost of the original agreement was simply too high for a city with a $14.5 million budget and already facing a $2.8 million deficit that largely stems from overtime for police during protests, lost sales tax revenue from businesses damaged in fires and looting, and legal expenses.

“I would rather lose our city by fighting for it in court than lose it by giving in to the DOJ’s crushing demands,” said Susan Ankenbrand, a 41-year resident of Ferguson.

But others said the agreement is important, regardless of the cost.

Kayla Green said injustices were tolerated for too long in Ferguson. “Cost should never be the reason not to do what’s right,” she said. “It is time to prioritize justice no matter how much it costs because justice is priceless.”

Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

AP photo: Ferguson Mayor James Knowles III

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. The DOJ’s insertion of Clause 4, Subsection C, paragraph 2: “Lynching of minorities will be forbidden” is really the straw that broke the camel’s back as far as Ferguson officials are concerned.

  2. In other words, because you can’t fund operations on the backs of poor citizens with discriminatory fines and penalties, you’ll go broke. And to add insult to injury, you’ll have to pay to have yourselves monitored and properly trained. Jesus Christ, is there no end to the oppression? Blue lives matter, right, Mr. Mayor?

    Looks like someone is going to have to pay some taxes around Ferguson, and it ain’t comin’ from the poor folk. Best get busy, Mayor Jimmy. You have a mess to clean up. I bet if you knew this before you ran for election, you’d be selling used cars instead.

  3. Avatar for theod theod says:

    Local yokels refuse to acknowledge that every little town in the area having its own fire/police/other infrastructure is simply nonsensical because it has never been cost-effective. That is exactly why overly aggressive penalties, fines, and ticketing were used to create ~25% of the local revenue. Consolidation of resources would save the necessary money, but of course dilute the power of the self-appointed power elites. A bit of bankruptcy would force sensible consolidation.

  4. Avatar for serge serge says:

    Won’t someone help that poor, poor mayor? He thought the grift would pay for all of this and his retirement, too. I have a sad for him.

  5. This is the mayor that said Ferguson has NO race problems.


    I hope the DOJ dissolves the police dept entirely.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

9 more replies


Avatar for system1 Avatar for paulw Avatar for ignatius_donnelly Avatar for serge Avatar for trippin Avatar for theod Avatar for steviedee111 Avatar for bradbennett Avatar for daveyjones64 Avatar for phlebas Avatar for lm945 Avatar for lcelsie Avatar for gusfabriani

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: