Morganton needs a public voice in police policy

In early 2024, when challenged to do something constructive for my community, I decided to review Morganton’s Use of Force policy.

I was surprised to discover that neither a printed copy nor a digital version was readily available to the public.

After filing a public records request, I received a PDF of the city’s 900-page police policy manual. I read it, took notes, and submitted several suggestions for improvement to the Department of Public Safety.

I never received a response.

During my research, I learned that many communities have established citizen advisory boards to encourage public participation in police policies and other policing matters.

In May 2024, I submitted a proposal recommending that Morganton establish a similar committee.

The silence from City Hall was its own kind of answer.

In January of this year, I tried again, this time under our new police chief, Ryan Lander. He graciously met with me and agreed to post key police policies on the city’s website — a welcome and meaningful step toward transparency. He was not, however, receptive to my suggested policy changes.

Last month, I asked Chief Lander a straightforward question: What is the proper procedure for a citizen who wishes to recommend a change to police policy?

His answer was equally straightforward. There is no formal procedure. Citizens may simply contact him directly.

I appreciate the chief’s willingness to hear from residents, but access to an individual is not the same as access to an established public process.

A sound process should be available to everyone, operate consistently, provide accountability, and survive changes in leadership.

Public participation should not depend on the accessibility or goodwill of whoever happens to occupy the chief’s office.

Recently, nearly two and a half years after my original proposal, I learned from the City Manager that establishing a Community Police Advisory Committee “is not a priority at this time” for the City Council.

I hope that decision does not rest on the assumption that this issue matters to only one person. The absence of public complaints does not establish the absence of a problem.

Most citizens have little reason to examine police policies until something goes wrong. By then, the opportunity for thoughtful, unhurried discussion may have passed.

Good government does not wait for a crisis before adopting good practices.

Police policies are not merely internal operating instructions. They govern some of the most consequential powers government exercises over its citizens, including the authority to detain, arrest, use force, and, under certain circumstances, take a human life.

Surely, policies governing such extraordinary powers deserve a meaningful opportunity for public review and input.

Nor is community participation in policing some radical or fringe concept. The International Association of Chiefs of Police, the U.S. Department of Justice, and Lexipol — the company that supplies Morganton’s police policy manual — have all promoted community involvement in policy development as an important element of effective policing.

The underlying principle is simple: Public confidence grows when citizens have an opportunity to understand how decisions are made, contribute their perspectives, and see that their concerns receive serious consideration.

To be clear, I am not suggesting that citizens should dictate police tactics or interfere with professional law enforcement decisions. Police officers possess training and experience that most residents do not.

Their expertise deserves respect. But professional expertise and public accountability are not competing values. Each strengthens the other.

Nor am I wedded to the idea of a permanent advisory board. A standing committee is probably the best option, but hardly the only one.

Morganton could establish periodic public policy reviews, a structured process for submitting recommendations, or another mechanism that allows residents to examine significant policies and receive reasoned responses explaining why suggestions were accepted or rejected.

The particular structure matters less than the principles behind it: transparency, consistency, responsiveness, and accountability.

Establishing a meaningful channel for citizen participation would simply acknowledge that the people governed by public safety policies deserve a voice in how those policies are developed and reviewed.

And there is no better time to establish such a process than now. There is no immediate crisis forcing officials and citizens into opposing camps.

When controversy erupts, positions harden, suspicions deepen, and even sensible reforms can appear to be concessions extracted under pressure.

A process established in calmer times, by contrast, demonstrates a genuine commitment to openness rather than a reluctant response to public outrage.

That is precisely why this is an opportunity worth seizing. Morganton has a chance to demonstrate that transparency and public participation are not emergency measures, but enduring principles of good government.

Trust cannot be borrowed in the middle of a controversy. It must be earned in the quiet years before.