A state-appointed Board of Police Commissioners held a public meeting on Wednesday and invited community members to share their perspectives. The attendees presented a unified message: they had serious reservations about the board’s direction and approach.
John Parker, proprietor of O’Connell’s Pub in South City, was among the first to address the board. Although he has long supported increased compensation for police officers, he criticized the board’s methodology. “What’s not logical is how this is happening,” Parker stated. He used an analogy, comparing the board’s actions to a child wanting to open Christmas presents on December 20 instead of waiting. “It’s not that you’re wrong—it’s how you’re doing it.”
Get a fresh take on the day’s top news
We will never send spam or annoying emails. Unsubscribe anytime.
Multiple speakers highlighted a particular concern: Mayor Cara Spencer is the sole elected board member, yet she has faced what many characterized as bullying from other board members.
James Dwyer, a Central West End resident, remarked: “From this outsider’s perspective, the optics are not good.”
Board President Chris Saracino maintained efficient proceedings by using a digital countdown timer that gave each speaker two minutes to address the board. While some initially objected to this format, it generally proved effective in keeping discussion moving forward. Speakers who exceeded their time limit were permitted to continue.
David Stokes from the libertarian Show-Me Institute contended that the board’s proposal to claim a portion of the Rams settlement funds was poorly conceived. (Stokes, a regular at public meetings, commended the timer’s sleek design.)
Beyond concerns about the mayor’s treatment, citizens raised additional objections. These included worries that an expanded police budget would result in reduced funding for other municipal services, the lack of drug testing for officers involved in vehicle accidents, and allegations that commissioner Don Brown faces a conflict of interest by serving on the board while his auto dealerships conduct business with the police department.
Alderwomen Alisha Sonnier and Daniela Velazquez also spoke, both expressing strong disagreement with the board and its first-year performance. Sonnier emphasized her support only for police departments operating under local government control.
“I don’t understand how going to battle with the city at every turn is improving the perception of the city, making our city safer,” Velazquez stated. Following the meeting, she warned that the board risked achieving a pyrrhic victory—securing a larger budget while sacrificing public trust in the process.
Beyond prominent local figures such as Stokes, Parker, Dwyer, and the alderwomen, several individuals with significant St. Louis profiles attended to voice their opinions.
Reverend Neal M. Thompson, whose business card identifies him as a spiritual advisor and the “Jesus guy,” remarked, “If we didn’t have this war machine going on, we could all have free food, free housing, free medical.” (His connection to the police board debate was unclear.)
Jazzmine Nolan-Echols, who has had her own notable history with city boards, criticized the mayor’s salary for being exempt from the same scrutiny applied to police officer compensation. She may have been the only speaker to refrain from criticizing the police board, though this was ambiguous.
The Police Board anticipated facing some public criticism at Wednesday’s meeting, though the extent and tone remained uncertain beforehand. While speakers unanimously opposed the board, certain comments proved easy to discount. One speaker made vague insinuations about undisclosed financial influences on the board’s decisions. Another voiced broad opposition to city police generally, characterizing them as “racist, transphobic, and work with ICE.”
Conversely, several speakers acknowledged they had not voted for Spencer—one referred to her as “data center Spencer”—yet supported her position on this particular issue. Overall, the public attendees displayed considerably less intensity than those who appeared at recent aldermanic hearings regarding Rams settlement fund allocation, despite some overlap in attendees. (For instance, the crowd expressed agreement with speakers through finger snapping rather than vocal outbursts, contrasting with the approach taken at the previous week’s Board of Aldermen meeting.)
Following public testimony, the commissioners offered brief remarks.
Don Brown stated that he has supplied vehicles to the police department since 1985 and that his dealership secures police business solely through competitive bidding, winning contracts because he submitted the lowest proposal.
Saracino responded by saying, “Public input is important to our work. All comments made today will be considered where appropriate.”
The meeting also addressed proposed compensation increases for police command staff—a proposal the mayor opposed. Spencer had successfully postponed the vote from two weeks prior to Wednesday’s session. She reiterated her objection to the raises, citing their occurrence late in the city’s budget process and the necessity for corresponding firefighter raises. “We have scrambled in the eleventh-point-nine hour,” she remarked.
The raises were approved by a 4-1 vote.
At the meeting’s conclusion, SLM asked Sonnier whether she found it surprising that virtually all speakers opposed the board in some manner. She said she did not.
“This is the least popular thing in St. Louis right now,” she said. “I think this and that sinkhole are going neck and neck.”
Editor’s note: A previous version of this story misstated Neal Thompson’s moniker.
