‘We aren’t in a rush’: Kansas City seeks ways to honor MLK after boulevard backlash
Since the last Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Kansas City has named — and unnamed — one of its major thoroughfares for the late civil rights leader, becoming once again, one of few major cities without a street named for King.
But with the help of hundreds of Kansas City residents, officials are working to find another way to honor his legacy.
Nearly a year ago, the City Council voted 8-4 to rename The Paseo for King, but the process sparked outrage in some communities and ended in an overwhelming citywide vote to remove King’s name from the prominent 10-mile boulevard.
Now city officials are working to find another landmark to name for King. The city’s Parks and Recreation Department has been accepting public comment for weeks, and so far more than 400 residents have responded. When that window closes, Mayor Quinton Lucas said, city officials will provide even more opportunities for public engagement to avoid the backlash seen last time.
“We aren’t in a rush,” said Lucas, who championed the City Council’s original renaming of The Paseo. “We want to make sure we get it right, but we want to make sure that people from throughout our community feel like they’re getting a chance to be a part of the conversation.”
The idea of renaming The Paseo for King dates back years, but the recent effort began nearly two years ago when a group of East Side ministers approached the Board of Parks and Recreation Commissioners with the proposal. When they were rebuffed, they turned to an initiative petition drive and, later, the City Council.
At the same time, a citizens commission appointed by then-Mayor Sly James recommended naming the forthcoming single terminal at Kansas City International Airport for King or renaming 63rd Street as preferred options ahead of The Paseo.
Eventually, the council voted to rename The Paseo, despite concerns of some members whose constituents along the boulevard said they didn’t support it. The city also opted not to collect signatures from residents of the street, a legal requirement Lucas and other supporters argued at the time is rarely enforced.
Should the city consider naming another street for King, Lucas said Friday, officials will gather those signatures.
Ensuring residents are part of the discussion is essential, said Kellie Jones, a spokeswoman for Save The Paseo, which organized the drive to restore the boulevard’s original name.
“We were formed because that public engagement didn’t happen and our voices weren’t heard,” said Jones, who lives on The Paseo.
After the public vote in November, Lucas called for new suggestions. Residents have until Feb. 12 to send in their feedback to MLKTribute@kcmo.org.
Lucas said 63rd and KCI have remained popular ideas, but some suggestions have been more improbable.
“Building a Martin Luther King Ferris wheel, I think, was one that was more interesting,” Lucas said.
Lucas has previously said the parks board could invest more money in Martin Luther King Jr. Square Park at Swope Parkway and Woodland Avenue. Already named for King, it would be “incredibly non-controversial” to develop the park into some kind of honor for him.
Jones said Save The Paseo was awaiting direction from Lucas, but she hopes the group will be part of the public discussion. The top priority is “engagement, engagement, engagement.”
“(King) is a great man, and we want a great honor for this great man,” Jones said.
Tex Sample, a pastor at Trinity United Methodist Church who was involved in the effort to rename The Paseo, said he’s still angry about the November vote to remove King’s name from The Paseo.
He rejects the idea that the City Council acted without engaging residents to rename the street for King, noting members debated it in public council meetings over several months.
“If you knew what was going on in the city, you knew very well that this had been in front of the City Council,” he said.
Sample said he had not heard suggested streets or landmarks that “spoke very strongly” to him as suitable to name for King, noting that 63rd was a popular proposal because it cuts through neighborhoods of varying socioeconomic and racial makeup.
“It does not have the status of a boulevard and therefore will not have the kind of care and attention that it would if it were a boulevard,” Sample said. “That’s part of my concern.”
Sample said he hoped to see the residents who didn’t support Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard step up to find another solution.
“I just think the fact that we’ve not gotten a street named after Dr. King is a moral failing,” Sample said, “and I think the onus is on the city to get that done.”
