KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Kansas City police officers will limit their use of less-lethal weapons such as tear gas, and other use-of-force tactics, to break up what they consider unruly protesters, according to a policy proposed by the Kansas City Police Department.
The "First Amendment-Protected Activities" policy was discussed Tuesday during the monthly meeting of the Kansas City Board of Police Commissioners. The proposed policy was presented to the board for review, and no immediate action was taken.
The new policy was created in response to protests last summer at the Country Club Plaza. During those demonstrations, Kansas City officers were criticized for their use of tear gas and other methods to disperse crowds after officers reported that objects were thrown at them.
Police Chief Rick Smith said it was important for the department to develop a "First Amendment policy," as a way to reevaluate how it responds to large demonstrations and public gatherings.
"I think these are good policies," Smith told police board members. "And I think these will serve our department and our community well."
Sheryl Ferguson, an organizer with the group It's Time 4 Justice, said the proposed policy appears to be similar to the suggestions offered by Mayor Quinton Lucas and other activists.
"Anything they are doing to not be bullies is better," said Ferguson, who has helped lead protests in front of police headquarters and on the Plaza.
"If within their actions, they are going to give a more stand-down approach then I think that's what it calls for because violence happens when they show up."
The proposed policy calls for officers to create a buffer zone between police and protesters. Officers are not allowed to intentionally escalate tensions between themselves and protesters.
Officers are prohibited from getting information about a protester solely based on the person's race, color, religion, disability, gender identity, language, sexual orientation or based on the person's support of a particular issue or cause, according to the proposal.
The Police Department will minimize the use of armored vehicles, personal protective equipment or other displays of force as long as it does not infringe on officer safety, according to the proposal. An incident commander will continuously evaluate the demonstration to determine if officers' presence is aggravating the situation.
Officers would be empowered to disperse crowds if they become disruptive or unruly and pose a potential danger to public safety or the destruction of property.
Lucas suggested the department devise, "a totality of circumstances standard" as part of the policy. If, for example, the Proud Boys group held a protest at City Hall, the incident commanders might consider "threats of immediate violence" in decisions on dispersing the crowd.
"This is a fairly strong policy, and we have made some good strides in making sure folks can express what they need to and make sure there's a public safety balance," he said.
Last summer, thousands of demonstrators gathered on the Plaza and in front of police headquarters to bring attention to police brutality following the killing of George Floyd, a Black man who died after a white police officer in Minneapolis pressed his knee into Floyd's neck for nearly nine minutes.
During the protests, hundreds of nonviolent protesters were accused of violating Kansas City's "failure to obey" ordinances.
Jackson County Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker said her office was reviewing video of Kansas City police officers who pepper-sprayed two protesters, arresting one after he yelled at police.
In July, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against Kansas City on behalf of three women who were arrested during the protests near the Plaza.
The ACLU accuses the city of enforcing unconstitutional ordinances.
Smith said police officials developed the policy after getting the input from various internal and external groups that included the Kansas City police union, the department's tactical response unit and their legal department. They also researched policies that other police departments have implemented.
Board members applauded the proposal because it would address an ongoing concern for law enforcement and the public.
