Missouri lawmakers working against wishes of KC police, mayor on where officers live

The Missouri legislature is inching closer to passing a bill allowing Kansas City police officers to live outside the city limits.

It’s the wrong bill at the wrong time. But its impact won’t be limited to the police department, a fact Kansas Citians should consider.

The Missouri Senate recently passed the police reform bill that ends the residency requirement. (At the last minute, an amendment was added requiring police to live in Missouri, and within 30 miles of the city.)

The House is expected to take up the bill soon. Mayor Quinton Lucas spent part of last week in Jefferson City trying to make the case for required residency, but made little progress.

“It doesn’t sound like there’s anybody who is going to take my perspective,” he said Monday. “I’m disappointed.”

Allowing Kansas City officers to live outside the city limits is fundamentally wrong. Police officers should obey the same laws they’re paid to enforce.

It’s also beyond despicable that the legislature, once again, is butting into a city’s business. The police chief, the police board, the mayor and members of the City Council all support a residency requirement. That should be enough.

But there’s another concern, which is this: If Kansas City police are permitted to live outside the city limits, Kansas City firefighters and other city workers will likely demand a similar accommodation.

The current city ordinance requires most workers to live inside the city.

“It’s certainly coming,” Councilwoman Katheryn Shields said. “If the police get it, it’s coming.”

Phone calls and emails to Local 42, the firefighters’ union, and Local 500, which represents other city workers, were not returned. We don’t know how quickly those bargaining groups might ask the council for a residency concession in contract talks.

But contract parity has been a feature of negotiations at City Hall for decades. Usually, police officers let Local 42 do the heavy lifting before insisting they get exactly what firefighters get. In this case, the discussion would work in the opposite direction.

“I don’t know how you would stop them,” Lucas said.

The city’s current residency requirement was written in 1966. If the City Council backs away from it now, it could mean the majority of roughly 6,500 city workers, including police, could eventually live outside the city.

This is not an idle concern. In 1999, Minnesota lawmakers lifted the residency requirement for Minneapolis officers. Today, fewer than 10% of those officers live in the city they serve.

None of the four officers accused in the George Floyd killing actually lived in Minneapolis at the time of the incident.

There is no argument that justifies this approach. Kansas City has quality neighborhoods, affordable homes, good school districts and other amenities. Employees have lots of choices when picking a place to live.

Opponents of a residency requirement point out, accurately, that few businesses in the private sector require workers to live in a certain place to qualify for a job. But police and firefighters and water services workers aren’t regular employees — they’re paid by taxpayers, or rate payers.

They’re public employees. They should live next to the public they’re supposed to protect, and serve.