KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Vice President Kamala Harris says she now has the necessary support from Democratic delegates to receive the nomination as the party’s presidential candidate.

Voters in the Kansas City area are excited to support Harris in the presidential election.

KSHB 41’s Charlie Keegan spoke to people voting in primary elections in Kansas and Missouri Tuesday.

The presidential race is not on the current ballot, but voters can’t help looking ahead to November.

“Last night, I threw out my Biden-Harris sign that I had been holding on to — my yard sign — thinking I would use it. So now, I’m waiting to get my new sign,” said Beth Jordan, a Harris supporter.

Voters like her are all-in on Harris because they want someone who will keep Democratic policies in place on issues like immigration, housing, taxation, and social programs.

“Since I’m social security age, I’d like her to keep social security going,” Debby Williamson said.

Dale Messing

Advertisement

Voters also feel a renewed energy with Harris becoming the front runner to replace Joe Biden who ended his reelection bid Sunday.

“I’m excited,” Peter Schloss said. “In fact, we were just discussing how much and when we should make donations.”

Dale Messing

Democrats said Harris’ campaign set fundraising records over the past two days.

“Now the tables are turned. Instead of Biden being the old, feeble man, somebody else is, right? That totally changes the perspective on it,” Sidney McCray said.

Dale Messing

Supporters also think Harris’ experience in government — particularly as vice president — will benefit her candidacy.

“As the vice president, she’s had a front row seat to every major decision over the past 3.5 years. So I think she has the great opportunity to continue the legacy,” said Jermaine Reed, a former council member in Kansas City.

Dale Messing

Voters who spoke with KSHB 41 News also felt emboldened by the opportunity to elect the first female president.

Republicans are jumping out to criticize how Harris handled policies along the US-Mexico border after President Biden assigned her to oversee the situation.

They also call her “unproven.”

—

Missouri Amendment 4 affects local funding and state oversight for Kansas City police.

Supporters say “adequate funding is needed” to keep the community safe, but Quinton Lucas, who has served as the city’s mayor since 2019, opposes the proposed amendment because it “takes power” from local officials.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

GREGORY HOLMAN, KSMU NEWS: Kansas City, Missouri Mayor Quinton Lucas, welcome to Ozarks Public Radio.

QUINTON LUCAS, KANSAS CITY MAYOR: It is great to be with you.

KSMU: Let’s get right to it. We’re here to talk about voting on Amendment 4 to the Missouri Constitution. This is a proposed amendment that would affect the Kansas City police department and its minimum funding. Every eligible voter in Missouri is going to have the chance to vote on this Amendment on August 6.

Now before we ask any questions, Mayor Lucas, let me just start by reading the ballot language for our listeners. I’m quoting from sample ballots.

“Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to authorize laws, passed before December 31st, 2026, that increase minimum funding for a police force established by a state board of police commissioners to ensure such police force has additional resources to serve its communities?

“This would authorize a law passed in 2022 increasing required funding by the City of Kansas City for police department requests from 20% of general revenue to 25%, an increase of $38,743,646, though the City previously provided that level of funding voluntarily. No other state or local governmental entities estimate costs or savings.”

So that’s the question all Missouri voters are being asked on their ballots for August 6.
Mayor Lucas, tell us about your views on Amendment 4. Why should people in the Ozarks and all around Missouri care about this issue?

LUCAS: Well, you know, it is on the ballot in the Ozarks and all around Missouri. So it is important to make sure a voice is heard from everyone. And I think that the biggest threat to somebody in the Ozarks or somewhere, anywhere else outside of Kansas City, is that the state could do the same thing to you.

This is a ballot question that asks in no unclear way, basically, to control the Kansas City Missouri budget. It asks for the statewide voters to say that Kansas City needs to spend more on this one area of its budget, not spending more on certain areas that we fund all the time, like healthcare, paying for firefighters, paying to fix our roads, and paying to address core basic issues. And it takes that power out of the city council and out of the mayor’s office, and having an ability to do so.

So I think the real reason somebody should care is if you’re worried about Jefferson City, bureaucrats, bureaucrats anywhere telling you what to do, then this is the very type of question that does just that. And that’s why I’ll be voting no.

KSMU: I want to ask you about the perspective on Amendment 4 from folks who disagree with you. One of the main backers of Amendment 4 is State Senator Tony Leutkemeyer. Now as many of our listeners know, the Senator is a Republican, you’re a Democrat, but the Senator is a Republican from the 34th District close to Kansas City.

And Senator Leutkemeyer wrote an opinion piece about Amendment 4 in the Kansas City Star on July 2. He wants Missourians to vote for the amendment. He accused your administration of trying to defund the Kansas City police department by tens of millions of dollars back in 2021 and writes that Amendment 4 would “stabilize the KCPD budget.” What’s your response to this type of argument?

LUCAS: Yeah, I mean, Tony is just sadly wrong. First of all, when I became mayor, the KCPD budget, our police budget in Kansas City, was $261 million. Now it is $317 million. That is a substantial percentage increase over where it was before. I also, just last year, raised police salaries by 30%. And so this isn’t an issue of funding of the police. I have, Kansas City has, consistently supported police funding.

We just want to be able to be like every other city in Missouri, and be able to make these determinations based on our own budgeting, based on our own negotiations, and frankly, based on being able to have some accountability. In what world do you say you get a blank check, and we can’t ask any questions about how you spend your money? That’s exactly what this ballot question is about.

You know currently in Kansas City, we have a 911 call-taker crisis where there are people — happened to my own family — who call 911 and have to wait on hold for five minutes. Some people as long as 10 minutes. And that has happened to thousands of Kansas Citians. Under our current system, the city council, the mayor, others, can’t push the police to do anything different about it.

Whereas what I want to do is say, heck, I want to give you money targeted to that very issue, so that you can hire more call-takers, so you can have more efficient operations there. This question precludes us from doing so. That’s how it’s a bad idea. And that’s just one example. And so I would respectfully disagree with the senator. We spent a whole lot of money to support our police.

We’ve increased it every year I’ve been in office, and I’ve been in office for nine years now [Editor’s note: That includes Lucas’s time as a city council member and mayor]. And I think we’ll continue to — we just want to be able to have good conversations, good accountability. And unlike the senator, who was running for reelection when this last came up — and I think that was a big part of why this was introduced — I’m somebody who’s term-limited, and I’m just saying this for the best interest of Kansas Citians long-term.

KSMU: I think it’s fair to say that a lot of folks living in rural Missouri are likely to take a view that Kansas City — and St. Louis, for that matter — have pretty severe crime problems and that even more state oversight and police spending is needed. What’s your reaction to that sort of Back the Blue viewpoint?

LUCAS: You know, I think my view is that if you can absolutely Back the Blue, you can absolutely be supportive of them, but also believe in local oversight. Just think about this: Do you want the mayor of Kansas City—? I’m Quinton Lucas, I’m a left-of-center guy and all of that, but do you want me running your local police department?

If I run for governor one day, and I’m able to get elected, do you want me a bunch of my friends, a bunch of bureaucrats in Jefferson City, telling you and your community what to do? What’s the priority? How much people need to get paid? Should you put more money into this category or another? That’s where my concern is.

I think about my children, I think about the people in this community who deserve that voice. So it isn’t just saying that, you know, Kansas City will be safer, because frankly, under current state control of policing, it’s not. We break homicide records under the control of a board, four of whom are appointed by the governor of Missouri, only one comes from the people of Kansas City, and that’s the mayor. And I think, frankly, long-term, we will be in a better position if you have a closer connection between law enforcement and the people of Kansas City.

So, I think it’s kind of a sheep in wolf’s clothing that, you know, you’re dealing with this thing, wolf in sheep’s clothing, rather, where you’re dealing with this thing, that seems kind of nice, right? We’re just gonna pay for the police more. But instead, what it actually is doing is saying you have no control. The state has control over how you’re going to spend your money. And if you want to make a change to it — too bad.

KSMU: Now, you alluded to some of the history and context here, and I want to ask about that. Back in 2022, Missouri voters passed Amendment 4, but in April of this year, Missouri Supreme Court rejected those results — I’m quoting from coverage by KCUR over in Kansas City that the state supreme court “ruled that the original ballot measure was so inaccurate that it ‘actually misled voters.’” What’s your view on that?

LUCAS: You know, my view is that that was a very wise decision. And I was sad that we had to get there. I am somebody who doesn’t like to file lawsuits against the state. I don’t like to have to get into these battles. But it’s about fundamental fairness for our voters. They tried to rush a question onto the ballot, they tried to rush a question on making it seem like it was just free. And I think a lot of people said understandably, ‘wait, we can get more good stuff for no cost.

That’s really cool.’ At least this time around, and I think it was rushed on the ballot again, after the Supreme Court decision. The — at least this time around — people get to see there will be a fiscal impact on Kansas City, we will lose our ability to spend $40 million a year on almost anything else. And I think that is something that, to me, is fundamentally challenging with having this type of provision. And don’t get me wrong — maybe we will elect to spend $100 million more on police services. But Kansas Citians go to the ballot, they vote for people. That’s how we should have things done in a representative democracy. What we shouldn’t have is state bureaucrats telling us what to do.

KSMU: Now if you spend $100 million more, we may call you back for another interview. [Mayor Lucas laughs.] But this is the last question for this one. Can you compare and contrast, briefly — if Amendment 4 passes, what can folks expect with Kansas City policing? Or if voters reject it this time, what’s going to happen?

LUCAS: Well, here’s the thing, if Amendment 4 passes, what you are going to see is a status quo, and to some people, things staying the same, status quo, sounds good. To the people of Kansas City, it doesn’t. And the last four years, we have broken our city’s homicide record, twice — twice.

We have a higher number of murders than we have ever had in the history of this city. In the past four years, we have had a homicide-department, a 911 call-taker crisis, where people are waiting on hold. Status quo, not accountability, is not good for the people of Kansas City. And I would submit to you, is not good for the people of Missouri. As you might have seen after the shooting at the Chiefs Super Bowl parade, a great event, lots of Missouri dignitaries, including the governor of Missouri were there.

The state legislature canceled session that day. We had a mass shooting, where 24 people were injured one woman lost her life. That’s not a status quo I want in Kansas City, and it’s not a status quo I want the state of Missouri. That’s why I think a vote no is the right one to break that type of status quo around us now.

Story by Emma Loura / The Manhattan Mercury:

Drivers heading into Riley from the east will need to start hitting the brakes a bit sooner.

The Riley County commission on Monday approved a request to lower the speed limit on Kansas Avenue east of Riley from 45 mph to 30 mph and place a flashing light there to alert drivers to slow down.

The decrease will affect the stretch of Kansas Avenue between the town’s eastern limit to a spot 500 feet east of Pheasant Ridge Road. That portion is a relatively straight, flat two-lane paved road with narrow shoulders.

The request came after the county conducted a speed study in the area and determined that the average driver hit the Riley east city limit at an average speed of 34 mph. County documents say the 85th percentile speed — at which speed limits are normally set — at the east city limit is 39 mph but that in this case, officials should consider the residential areas along Kansas Avenue, which increase the number of cars, pedestrians and bikers there.

Riley County Grade School and Riley East Park are within walking distance, and a neighbor reported to those doing the study that they had seen pedestrians walking along the road to and from the school and park.

County public works director John Ellermann, who made the pitch to commissioners, said the flashing yellow light will help indicate the speed-limit change to drivers.

“I’d like to suggest we put up a flashing light on these signs,” Ellermann said, “That way it draws attention to that sign, and it’s a big sign to make drivers aware that they need to slow down.”

Ellermann said the solar-powered light would cost about $2,500 including installation. Putting up and relocating speed-limit signs would cost less than $500.

He said the solar-powered light would cost about $2,500 including installation. Putting up and relocating speed-limit signs would cost less than $500.