Aldermen advance resolution opposing state-controlled police board’s budget; amendment urges lawsuit to clarify funding calculation

The Public Safety Committee on Tuesday passed Resolution 2‑58 as amended, a statement opposing actions by the state-controlled Board of Police Commissioners and urging further legal clarification of how much of the city’s general revenue fund must be appropriated to the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department.

Sponsor Alderman Rasheen Aldridge framed the resolution as a response to what he characterized as an ‘‘outlandish’’ budget request from the state-appointed commissioners that, if approved, would divert funds from essential city services and tornado recovery efforts. Aldridge and multiple committee members said residents across St. Louis — especially on the north side recovering from a May tornado — would be harmed if the police appropriation increased substantially.

President Megan Green gave a procedural overview of the city’s budget authority, noting that the Board of Estimate and Apportionment (the president, the mayor and the comptroller), the Budget Committee and the Board of Aldermen retain statutory roles in putting a balanced budget in place and that a department’s request does not automatically become appropriated.

Public testimony filled multiple hours and included about two dozen speakers in support of the resolution. Residents, neighborhood advocates and nonprofit representatives argued the proposed police-board budget (speakers cited figures ranging from an additional $40 million to proposals near $250–330 million in various public comments) would be an ‘‘unfunded mandate’’ that could force cuts to housing recovery, the Office of Violence Prevention and other services. Several commenters urged the mayor’s office to file suit; committee testimony and amendment debate explicitly put litigation on the table as a tool to clarify statutory calculations.

Amendment No. 1, offered from the chair, added a ‘‘be it further resolved’’ clause urging the city counselor to file for declaratory judgment in a court of competent jurisdiction to determine the methodology and dollar amount that constitutes the statutory appropriation (including the calculation of the 25% floor by fiscal year 2028). The committee adopted the amendment by roll call (recorded as six ayes and one present) and then passed Resolution 2‑58 as amended out of committee with a due-pass recommendation.

The action sends a political message of opposition and instructs the city’s legal office to seek judicial clarification on how the state statute’s required appropriation is calculated. The resolution is nonbinding but positions the Board of Aldermen to press for city legal action and continued oversight as the budget process proceeds.