North Missourian publisher and editor Darryl Wilkinson comments on the police controversy.
This website brought to you in part by the following sponsor:
Find out how to advertise here - Email us! [email protected]
by Darryl Wilkinson
For many folks living here, this controversy about Gallatin’s police is bewildering and exploded rather unexpectedly. Past experience indicates that anything which vaults Gallatin’s name into daily newspaper headlines and regional TV news so quickly is not good.
I do not have nor am I likely to ever have all the facts to share with you. But it appears that some citizens have been led down a path of misguided emotion. The controversy has been about job security for two Gallatin policemen, not about whether Gallatin should have a police department.
The real issue here remains unclearly defined: What amount of city police protection does Gallatin want, what do we need, and what can we afford?
I suspect a thorough canvassing of all who live here would reveal vastly contrasting and even contradictory opinion. We probably would come closest to a consensus on what kind of police protection we want; we’d argue endlessly about what we need; and, if we did our homework, we’d be startled and disappointed by what we can afford.
We want professionals for city policemen …but not “too” professional. We want Andy Griffith of Mayberry. That favorite TV show defines the perfect small-town police chief. But, and just as unfairly, the show also has strapped every city policeman with the stereotype of the bumbling Barney Fife.
Policemen are no different than you and I. They are not perfect. Sometimes they shine like Andy Griffith; many stood up at Monday night’s public meeting to share that insight about Gallatin police. Sometimes they stumble like a Barney Fife, such as when a dog gets shot in a back yard …or when a deer damages a patrol car in a chase on Highway 6 outside city limits …or when a parking ticket summons a driver into court for briefly using a handicapped space at 2 a.m. on the business square …or when a calendar picture (commissioned by the police, no less) shows all Gallatin officers lined up with guns drawn and pointing menacingly behind a patrol car, comically like a hometown version of SWAT (that’s the January 1999 issue; are you ready for the new millennium?).
It is not good to paint every policeman as either an Andy Griffith or a Barney Fife. It is not good whenever public discussion is reduced to an “Us” or “Them” mentality. It is not good when it seems that whoever yells the loudest at a meeting wins.
It is not good when individuals on the board of aldermen become the irritant, diverting attention from the real issue at hand. It is not good when agitators paint the entire board of aldermen one way based on the ill-advised comments and actions of just one board member.
It is not good for Gallatin to train officers who leave for better jobs elsewhere (over 20 have served since Dale Cox was police chief, according to one alderman). It is not good when nobody runs for elected office; apathy breeds distrust.
It is not good whenever personnel matters are forced into public scrutiny, whether it’s a city council, a school board, a street department, a county bridge crew, a water district, a bank, a publishing company or a police department.
It is not good when anyone makes up his or her mind on something without having all the facts. It is not good when anyone without all the facts suggests he speaks for the entire community. It is not good when we quit listening.
But it is entertaining.
That’s why Gallatin vaults into the headlines of daily newspapers and gets a splash on the TV news, particularly with the assistance of local agitators. It’s partly why city folks like such stories about small towns; smugly, it makes them feel better even though our problems are, really, much the same. City police problems burden all small towns because it’s not about dollars or electric cable or water pumps. It’s about people.
Anyone who has shouldered the responsibilities of taking a seat on a public board or writes the payroll in private business knows that personnel issues are the hardest. A board is privileged by law to facts that are to go unsaid publicly. To do otherwise risks lawsuit. We can only trust that Gallatin’s aldermen are acting on facts. If that trust is gone, well, that’s why there are elections.
It is not good that Gallatin has this controversy now. It infects other issues that need attention. Worse, Gallatin is now at an even greater disadvantage in attracting and retaining new city police officers.
Surely, at least upon this last point, we all can agree that this is not good.