SPONSOR: Hicks
COMMITTEE ACTION: Voted "Do Pass with HCS" by the Standing Committee on Judiciary by a vote of 14 to 1. Voted "Return to the Committee of Origin" by the Standing Committee on Rules- Administrative Oversight by a vote of 8 to 1. Voted "Do Pass with HCS #2" by the Standing Committee on Judiciary by a vote of 13 to 3. Voted "Do Pass" by the Standing Committee on Rules- Administrative Oversight by a vote of 5 to 4.
The following is a summary of the House Committee Substitute #2 for HB 1604.
This bill amends the restriction that commissioned and civilian personnel who were previously employed by the Board of Police Commissioners be required, throughout their employment for the City of St. Louis, to retain a primary residence in the City of St. Louis for a total of seven years before being permitted to maintain a residence outside the City of St. Louis as long as the residence is located within a one-hour response time. This bill specifies that, commissioned and civilian personnel who are employed by a municipal police force will not be subject to a residency restriction so long as the employee's primary residence is located within a one-hour response time. These provisions will not apply to the Missouri Highway Patrol.
Additionally, all St. Louis City employees will not be required to reside within city limits.
HCS #2 removed the provision that no city, village, town, county, township, or board of police or of police commissioners may require current or prospective law enforcement officers to reside within any jurisdictional limit but may require such current or prospective officers to reside within a one-hour response time, which was added in the first HCS.
The following is a summary of the public testimony from the committee hearing. The testimony was based on the introduced version of the bill.
PROPONENTS: Supporters say that the safety of St. Louis residents is of great concern and the St. Louis Police Department is severely understaffed, including having a shortage of officers but also of civilian personnel. The department testified that it is having a difficult time recruiting and retaining good police officers, and there are people who reside outside the city who would really like to work for the department but do not want to uproot their lives, primarily when their kids are established at schools, to move to the city. There are also officers who were hired in the last few years who are unable to move out of the city but would like to. It is difficult for officers sometimes to reside in the same city where they work because there is a likelihood of increased threats to those officers' and their families' safety if they encounter parolees who the officers were instrumental in helping to convict. The Mayor of the City of St. Louis testified that there are wonderful neighborhoods in the city and no one needs to be forced to live there and she does not believe it will create a flight of officers who are eager to leave the city.
Testifying for the bill were Representative Hicks; St. Louis Regional Chamber; Missouri Attorney General; David Rudolph, St. Louis Police Officers Association; Demetrius Alfred, St Louis Local 73; Missouri Fraternal Order of Police; Jimmie Edwards, Department of Public Safety St. Louis; John Hayden, St. Louis Police Department; Civic Progress; Lyda Krewson, City of St. Louis; Nicholas Hayden, St. Louis Police Officers Association; Robert Shockey, Missouri Police Chiefs; Stephen (Jay) Schroeder, St. Louis Police Officers Association; and the St Louis County Police Association.
OPPONENTS: Those who oppose the bill say they believe in community and they believe that, if you are going to get a salary and a pension from the police department, you should live in the city.
Testifying against the bill was Arnie C. Dienoff.
OTHERS: Others testifying on the bill say that they are supportive of this bill as it is currently written but would oppose it if it were to extend to the entire state, specifically to Kansas City. While the City of St. Louis is 62 square miles, Kansas City spans over 300 square miles and includes several school districts and many diverse neighborhoods. They believe that, for Kansas City, it would be a solution looking for a problem. The Kansas City Fraternal Order of Police would be supportive of the bill being opened up to the entire state to include Kansas City.
Testifying on the bill was the City of Kansas City and the Kansas City Fraternal Order of Police.
Statutes affected: