After years of making local control of the St. Louis Police Department a priority, the American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri has filed a lawsuit against one version of local control this year. Why? Because the ballot initiative that would transfer the police from state to municipal control has buried within it new provisions that undermine civilian control of the police — the very principle behind local control in the first place.

The ballot initiative would carve out two exemptions for the St. Louis police in limiting civilian input and transparency for this department in ways not applicable to any other department in the state. The exemptions stem from language that gives "exclusive authority over discipline procedures and processes" to the Civil Service Commission and closes all disciplinary records to anyone outside that commission.

Such severe restrictions eviscerate St. Louis' ability to create an effective Civilian Review Board and undermine the Missouri Sunshine Law.

Missouri's civilian review statutes, created in 2000, recognize the need for a civilian check on police power. We've seen the need for such oversight in the recent Post-Dispatch revelations that shootings by police are not thoroughly investigated here. A review board could assure that independent citizens can investigate complaints and make recommendations regarding discipline and necessary policy changes. But no review board can be effective if it is blocked from seeing those records required for a determination of the facts. Such would be the case for St. Louis, and St. Louis alone, should the current ballot initiative become law. Instead, it should be up to St. Louis to design civilian review or any other components of our governing structure.

By closing all disciplinary records, this initiative would also bar St. Louisans from access to discipline records currently open under the Missouri Sunshine Law. That law allows police investigations of officers to be public records if they stem from an allegation of a crime. Citizens have a right to know the details of purported criminal activity by those given powers of life and death and acting under color of law. Shielding St. Louis police from scrutiny is not in the public interest.

These special exemptions for St. Louis police beg the question, "What is the purpose of local control if not to increase citizen input and proper oversight of the police?" It is proper that civilian authority be exercised at the municipal level because local citizens have a stake in the outcomes. But local control is a reality for the vast majority of cities and has not often improved police-community relations. It will succeed in that goal only if structures are designed to include citizens in the process.

In contrast, this ballot initiative was put together behind closed doors and presumably involved only representatives of the mayor, the St. Louis Police Officers' Association and Rex Sinquefield, the activist who is paying for the petition effort. The result represents their interests, but it does not have the sober balance that could have been achieved if all the stakeholders, including citizen groups, had been at the table. We have gotten this far with local control based on a broad coalition of supporters, and this is no time to falter because a few have decided to look out only for themselves.

Fortunately, we have a legislative alternative in Senate Bill 461 in the Missouri Senate. This bill already has been through a democratic give-and-take and does not contain the preemptive exclusions outlined here. It safeguards the pensions and benefits of police while leaving more room for the city to make crucial governance decisions. The SLPOA, Mr. Sinquefield, and all Missourians should support this more expansive path to local control.

Brenda Jones is executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri.