Feds sue after Ferguson leaders try to revise civil rights deal

FERGUSON, Mo.— The federal government sued Ferguson on Wednesday, one day after the city council voted to revise an agreement aimed at improving the way police and courts treat poor people and minorities in the St. Louis suburb.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch said Ferguson’s decision to reject the deal left the department no choice except to file a civilrights lawsuit.

“The residents of Ferguson have waited nearly a year for the city to adopt an agreement that would protect their rights and keep them safe. They have waited decades for justice. They should not be forced to wait any longer,” Lynch said.

The complaint accuses Ferguson of violating residents’ rights and misusing law enforcement to generate revenue — a practice the government alleged was “ongoing and pervasive.”

Ferguson spokesman Jeff Small declined to comment. Messages left with Mayor James Knowles III were not returned.

Ferguson has been under Justice Department scrutiny since Michael Brown, 18, who was black and unarmed, was fatally shot by white officer Darren Wilson 18 months ago. A grand jury and the Justice Department declined to prosecute Wilson, who resigned in November 2014.

But a scathing Justice Department report was critical of police and a profitdriven municipal court system. Following months of negotiations, an agreement between the federal agency and Ferguson was announced in January.

A recent financial analysis determined the agreement would cost the struggling city nearly $4 million in the first year alone. The council voted 6-0 Tuesday to adopt the deal, but with seven amendments.

Hours before the lawsuit was announced, Ferguson leaders said theywere willing to sit down with Justice Department negotiators to drawup a new agreement.

“We ask that if they (the Justice Department) feel there needs to be some additional changes to the agreement, we sit down and talk,” Knowles said.

That seemed unlikely from the outset. Within hours of the Tuesday vote, Vanita Gupta, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, said in a statement that the department would take “the necessary legal actions” to ensure Ferguson’s police and court practices comply with the Constitution and federal laws.

Knowles said the seven amendments were formulated after the analysis showed the deal was so expensive it could lead to dis- solution of Ferguson. The analysis suggested that the first-year cost of the agreement would be $2.2 million to $3.7 million, with second- and third-year costs between $1.8 million and $3 million in each year.

Ferguson has an operating budget of $14.5 million and already faces a $2.8 million deficit. Voters will be asked to approve two tax hikes in April, but approval of both would still leave the city short.

A big part of the cost was the requirement that Ferguson raise police salaries to attract better candidates, including more minority officers. Removal of the clause was among the seven amendments.

Another new provision states that the agreement will not apply to any other governmental entity that might take over duties currently provided by Ferguson. That means, for example, that St. Louis County would not be beholden to the agreement if it takes over policing in Ferguson.

St. Louis County police spokesman Brian Schellman said if the county were ever asked to take over policing in Ferguson, “we would consider the implications of the consent decree before entering into such an agreement.”

Knowles doesn’t believe neighboring municipal departments would agree to cover Ferguson under the Justice Department’s requirements.