BRATTLEBORO — The Community Proposal to be considered by the Selectboard, offered as a way to create, fund, and control the process of evaluating the Police Department and associated public safety concerns, is an earnest, well-intentioned, and fundamentally flawed document.
As presented, it would mostly serve the town and its population by addressing the anger and guilt resulting from the historic injustices suffered by indigenous people and people of color. If the town and its residents wish to see a system in place that will legitimately result in the safety of the people from both crime and oppression, then a more comprehensive, fair, and democratic process will be needed.
Without a doubt, many of the concerns represented in the Community Proposal reflect widespread patterns of wrongdoing by law enforcement agencies throughout our country.
One cannot help but see instances of this type of criminal activity with even a glance at news reports from across America. The high-profile events - such as George Floyd's death at the hands of the police in Minneapolis and the federal law enforcement instigation of riots in many communities as a result - are just the tip of the iceberg.
Changing the dynamics that lead to such injustices must be a priority for every community. The process must begin, and is beginning, right now.
But how to begin?
* * *
Part of the problem with the Community Proposal is the apparent assumption that all of the problems occurring anywhere in this country are also occurring here in Brattleboro. Not only is this not true, it is acknowledged not to be true by many of the creators of the proposal itself.
The activist community in Brattleboro has spoken out many times in appreciation of the willingness of the police department, and particularly of Chief Michael Fitzgerald, to engage with voices of the community and to respectfully protect the citizens and their rights when action is required.
And beyond that, a larger problem with the Community Proposal is the manifestly undemocratic procedures and processes it envisions, which would deprive many members of the community of any meaningful opportunity to participate. Such an approach is illegitimate and should not be a part of the governance of the town.
Yes, inclusivity is important. Steps to solicit input from historically marginalized and underrepresented people must be implemented, but not by excluding others who have legitimate interests in policing and public safety - which clearly means everyone.
What group can you name that does not require a safe physical and social environment? Who does not deserve to have their thoughts and feelings represented in a matter of fundamental importance to any community? Whose rights should be compromised in order to lift up the rights of others? Who gets to decide?
* * *
The reality is that in Brattleboro, we not only have an open and affirming police chief, we have a wide-open town government, one that has been imploring its citizens to increase their participation for years, with at best modest and at times negligible results.
Open seats for Representative Town Meeting go begging each year. Town boards and committees function with too few members, if they function at all. From Selectboard to School Board to second constable and weigher of coal, elected and appointed positions often draw the minimum number of candidates and, sometimes, none at all.
In this setting, is there really a need to create a new bureaucracy in which people are discriminated against or excluded by race, gender, age, or other conditions? That's what the Community Proposal does, and seems intended to do.
In clause after clause, preference is given to some groups over others. Sometimes, it is explicitly the creators of the document who are to receive favored status.
The proposed Review Committee would largely reflect one point of view, pointing toward a preordained outcome that reflects the wishes of its creators, who believe this outcome is justified by prior injustices.
* * *
In the end, and even in the beginning, this approach is wrong. Creating unrepresentative and exclusionary systems will result in worse outcomes now and, likely, in further injustices later.
Instead, why not create a process that includes everyone?
And if you want to represent the community, why not run for office? Why not take over the Selectboard and Representative Town Meeting?
Those who wish to move the political process in the direction of their vision are welcome to do so, but in a democracy they must achieve their goals through systems in which all voices can be raised and be heard.
After all, isn't the inclusion of all voices the whole basis of what they are saying we need to do?