Kansas City’s mayor wants to block Missouri’s KCPD funding law. Is it unconstitutional?

A lawsuit filed this week by Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas could imperil a new Missouri law that requires the city to spend a higher percentage of its budget on police.

Some legal experts told The Star this week that a provision in the state constitution called the Hancock Amendment could cause the courts to rule the law as unconstitutional. The more than 40-year-old amendment prevents state lawmakers from forcing local governments to increase funding for specific services unless the state provides the money to do so.

That amendment may allow Lucas to prevail in getting a judge to block the law from taking effect prior to a Nov. 8 vote where voters will be asked to pass an amendment that would retroactively make it constitutional. A ruling against the new law would mark a significant victory for Lucas in his ongoing battle with Missouri Republican state lawmakers on policing policy.

The litigation illustrates a complicated legal situation where state lawmakers knowingly passed a bill with murky legal basis and are simultaneously seeking to amend the constitution after the fact.

“I think the city may win,” said Michael Wolff, a former Missouri Supreme Court judge appointed by Democratic Gov. Mel Carnahan who served as chief justice from 2005 to 2007. “If you want to take the Hancock Amendment seriously, and I think the courts over the years have, the state’s got a tough case.”

It’s still unclear what argument the state of Missouri will make to fight Lucas’ lawsuit, but it will likely try to drag out the proceedings until November. State lawmakers have already acknowledged concerns about the law’s constitutionality and are trying to get voters to amend the constitution.

Republican response to Lucas’ lawsuit

Supporters of the law this week sidestepped questions about its constitutionality and instead contended the law was needed to push back on Lucas’ failed 2021 attempt to assert more control over the police budget.

“This taxpayer-funded lawsuit is the latest effort by the city to continue its radical quest to defund the police,” state Sen. Tony Luetkemeyer, a Parkville Republican who sponsored the legislation, said Wednesday in a statement. “I’m confident Attorney General Eric Schmitt and the police board will do everything to defend the new law to keep our region safe.”

Todd Graves, a partner at the powerful Kansas City law firm Graves Garrett LLC and a former chair of the Missouri Republican Party, said Thursday that even if Lucas does prevail, voters will ultimately decide the law’s constitutionality at the ballot box. He said he doesn’t think a judge will rule on the case until after the election.

“If the voters vote to change the constitution, this is all just kind of political theater right now,” Graves said.

Tony Luetkemeyer’s wife Lucinda Luetkemeyer is also a partner at Graves Garrett LLC.

Asked about the state’s legal strategy, Chris Nuelle, a spokesperson for Schmitt, declined comment. Schmitt, who is named as a defendant in Lucas’ lawsuit, is running for U.S. Senate and will appear on the same November ballot as the proposed amendment that would enable the law to be considered constitutional.

What’s the budget impact for Kansas City?

The police spending legislation, which is set to take effect on Aug. 28, raises the percentage of Kansas City’s general revenue that must be spent on police from the current minimum of 20% to 25%.

Lucas’ lawsuit argues that it would require the city to increase its allocation to the Kansas City Police Department by more than $38 million. This would force the city to cut funding from other government services like its fire department, road repairs and parks, the lawsuit contends.

“By saying that the city of Kansas City has to devote one-fourth of its budget to the police instead of one-fifth of its budget…you are requiring them to expend additional resources on the police,” said Chuck Hatfield, a Jefferson City-based attorney who has worked for prominent Missouri Democrats, including former Gov. Jay Nixon and former U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill.

“I think they’ve got a very strong argument based on prior case law that that does violate the constitution and that’s a Hancock problem.”

Hatfield said Lucas’ argument is buttressed by a 1992 ruling by the Missouri Supreme Court that invoked the Hancock Amendment – which prohibits unfunded mandates by state lawmakers. In that case, the high court found that the state of Missouri could not require school districts to provide new special education services “until the legislature provides a specific appropriation” to fund the state portion of the program.

“This bill, I think pretty clearly is requiring the city to pay for more police services than it previously did…and that is the type of thing the Hancock Amendment is supposed to prevent,” Hatfield said. “The Hancock Amendment is designed to address this situation.”

The goal of Lucas’ lawsuit is to challenge the constitutionality of the entire legislation, said Morgan Said, Lucas’ chief of staff.

If the lawsuit prevails before November, the law would be considered unconstitutional and Kansas City would not be required to increase the amount of funding it sends to its police department.

A ruling in Lucas’ favor, however, would have no impact on the upcoming ballot question where voters will decide to amend the constitution, giving the state legislature the power to pass future laws to force Kansas City to increase its police funding.

If the law is deemed unconstitutional, but voters approve the constitutional amendment, state lawmakers would have until 2026 to pass another police spending bill.

The deadline for Kansas City to challenge the wording of the upcoming ballot question has already passed. But, last week, Kansas City officials floated a possible challenge to the constitutional amendment post-election.

In a letter to Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft last week, a lawyer for the city said the ballot question inaccurately states that the police spending measure would have no fiscal impact on the city. The letter threatened legal action if the question was not amended.

“It would be unfortunate—and needlessly wasteful—if your office had to administer a second election on the ballot question as a result of its refusal to accurately characterize the City’s position on a constitutional amendment that is squarely directed at the City,” the letter said.

Kansas City is the only city in the state that lacks local control over its police department. Under a 1939 law, the city’s police department is controlled by a board of five commissioners appointed almost entirely by the governor. Lucas, as mayor, is the board’s fifth member.

The state law to increase Kansas City’s police funding was Republican state lawmakers’ response to an effort by Lucas and the city council to assert more control over police spending.

In 2021, Lucas and the council orchestrated a plan that would have funded police at the required 20% threshold, but allowed the city to control spending above that amount. The police board sued and a circuit court judge ruled that the council had overstepped its authority.

Republican state lawmakers have since painted Lucas’ move as an effort to cut funding from the police department. Lucas had denied this, arguing that the city regularly funds the department above the required 20% threshold.