Who voted "no"?

Will the police board cooperate, share authority?

Voting in favor(17 of 29):
Troupe (1)
Flowers (2)
Bosley(3)
Shelton (4)
Ford-Griffin (5)
Reed(6)
Young (7)
Florida(15)
Baringer(16)
Kennedy(18)
McMillan(19)
Schmid(20)
Jones-King(21)
Boyd(22)
Williamson(26)
Carter(27)
Shrewsbury (President)
Voting Against (12 of 29):
Conway(8)
Ortmann(9)
Vollmer(10)
Villa(11)
Heitert(12)
Wessels(13)
Gregali(14)
Roddy(17)
Hanrahan(23)
Waterhouse(24)
Kirner(25)
Krewson(28)

Police Board says no deal to this proposal in this morning's Worst-Dispatch. Will the Mayor Veto it, Sign it, or let it become law without his signature?

Baringer's yes vote is a pleasant surprise, considering the Police Officers Association had endorsed her in her Democratic primary win. (SLPOA endorsed both Donna and her Republican opponent in the general.)

I believe Roddy voted yes and Baringer voted no.

I applaud President Shrewsbury and Alds. Schmid, Young, and Florida for crossing the racial divide on this bill and recognizing that everybody benefits from a more accountable police force.

It may also reflect that, of course, Shrewsbury represents a citywide constituency and the other three represent diverse wards where many residents (for better or for worse) have frequent contact with the SLMPD and are often frustrated with their actions and/or inactions.

Now let's see what actually results from this vote.

Those voting no did so based on what?

Worried Citizen's corrections of observer's report are correct.

It's too bad Baringer didn't follow the lead of her predecessor and mentor, Ald Prez Jim Shrewsbury.

The "no" majority on the south side (+ Krewson) shows the Police Officers Association has more clout with those aldermen than with voters. The aldermen haven't figured out that the SLPOA endorsement doesn't really carry much weight with the public.