ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Sometimes, there is meaning in a juxtaposition of headlines.

So it was on the front page of Tuesday’s Post-Dispatch with two stories related to the concept of residency rules, a common requirement that certain taxpayer-supported employees should live in specifically identified areas.

“Parson signs residency bill,� read the first. Until a positive COVID-19 test sidelined him on Wednesday, Gov. Mike Parson was scheduled to appear with police union representatives patting himself on the back for his only real success story in a special session he called to battle rising homicide rates in St. Louis and Kansas City. Repealing the residency rule has long been a goal of the St. Louis Police Officers Association, so its members could live in the county and commute to the city. With the support of Mayor Lyda Krewson, a Democrat, Parson turned the issue into part of his “tough-on-crime� agenda, though it’s not really that.

Supporters of the new law, who have been unsuccessful getting St. Louis voters to change the residency rule, suggested to the Republicans who control the Missouri Legislature that the change would magically create an opportunity for the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department to make up for its shortage of around 130 officers, according to the department’s prescribed strength. Never mind that such an analysis doesn’t even take into consideration whether that prescribed change could help reduce homicides.

The city of St. Louis has more police officers per capita — about 38 per 10,000 residents, according to the FBI — than most comparable cities nationwide, and is far above national averages.

Early in her tenure as mayor, Krewson made a big deal out of offering waivers to the residency rule to attract police officers. It didn’t work. Only two such waivers have been granted citywide in the past 16 years, says the city’s personnel director, Richard Frank, only one to a police officer. That’s in part because of the way the police department recruits new officers, almost entirely through its police academy.

The academy has been graduating full classes, and the applicants have all lived in the city or agreed to move to the city by the prescribed time, which could give them as long as 22 months, the way police training and probationary periods work, Frank says. He’s supportive of getting rid of the residency rule for all city employees. The entire city has about 800 openings, he says, and it could help with hiring. City voters will decide Nov. 3 whether they agree with him.

But the residency rule won’t magically change police hiring, unless the department plans to start hiring qualified and experienced officers from other departments to fill its ranks. I asked the mayor’s office if that was the plan, and they told me to ask the police department. I asked the police department and its spokesman wouldn’t say what the plan is.

“We will surely use this to increase our recruiting,� said Sgt. Keith Barrett. How? I asked. I didn’t get a response. Neither did city aldermen on Tuesday when they quizzed police Chief John Hayden, who told them he hoped to gain a net of 100 officers over the next year. He did not map out a plan to get there. Hope is but a unicorn as homicides rise.

Which brings us to the second headline. One of the supporters of the residency bill was state Rep. Nick Schroer, R-O’Fallon, or, perhaps, R-Defiance. “Lawmaker listed out-of-district address as primary residence,� reads the headline. As Schroer was making it easier for St. Louis police officers to move to the county, he was living outside his district, in violation of state law, alleges a lawsuit that has been filed against him. Schroer claims to be living with a constituent, in a spare bedroom, away from his family.

The law in question, which tough-on-crime lawmakers didn’t address, says that if an elected representative moves out of his district for whatever reason, and Schroer appears to have a good one, then he or she must give up that seat. Schroer isn’t budging. So much for law and order.

Truth is, I’ve always been agnostic about residency requirements. Only once, when I was editor of a small weekly newspaper in a mountain resort town, was one applied to me. I couldn’t afford to live in that town, but I rented a ramshackle cabin and made it work. I understood why my boss wanted me to live in town. It was a sacrifice I was willing to make.

But that’s not really the issue here. This is: As Parson campaigns for governor against Democratic state Auditor Nicole Galloway, he is touting the two bills he passed as being tough on crime. The residency rule, if it ever helps, won’t make a dent for months, or years, at best. The second bill was a witness protection fund that Parson and lawmakers chose not to fund. It’s meaningless.

Just like the special session that ended with a whimper.