Citizens in Fayette will have the opportunity on Tuesday to cast their votes in favor of or against the city’s proposal to change the elected City Marshal to an appointed Chief of Police.

The Fayette Board of Aldermen voted in July to put the proposal before voters. If approved, the change will take effect when the current City Marshal’s term ends in April.

Taxpayers will also shoulder the cost, regardless of the outcome. The election will cost around $5,000 to stage.

In recent weeks, the matter has become a hot-button issue on social media. Insightful letters by former city officials for and against the change appear on Page 4 of this newspaper.

The primary concern among opponents of the measure is giving up the right of citizens to vote for City Marshal and instead handing that right over to six members of the city council, who are usually, but not always, elected. (Until recently, some seats had been filled by appointment by the Mayor to address vacancies after no candidates ran.)

Other criticisms include the city council itself, the makeup of which has the potential to change every April due to annual elections. While constituents may support (or condemn) the current council, it could change by half after April’s municipal election. Each of the city’s three wards has two representatives who serve two-year terms and are elected in alternating years. Half of the council seats could change during municipal elections held each April, raising broader long-term considerations for voters.

Coincidentally, those in favor of changing the City Marshal to an appointed Chief cite annual city council elections in their arguments. In other words, if you don’t like the current Chief of Police, you can vote in new members of the city council who can potentially appoint a new Chief.

Proponents of the change cite drawbacks to the current system, such as a limited candidate pool. State statute requires any candidate for City Marshal to live inside the city limits. Changing to an appointed Chief would broaden the voting pool. Potential Chiefs could live elsewhere in, or even outside of, the county.

Supporters also say that a Chief of Police can be held more accountable by the council, which can fire and appoint anew at any time, rather than waiting until the Marshal’s four-year term expires or for voters to initiate a recall election.

However, critics say that Chiefs serving at the council’s behest are left open to corruption. Such allegations were made in Glasgow in recent years.

Opponents have also criticized the vague ballot language of the proposal, which simply reads: “Shall the City of Fayette, Missouri appoint a Chief of Police who shall perform all the duties of the City Marshal as authorized by Section 79.050 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri? If approved, the appointment of a Chief of Police will take effect after the current City Marshal’s term has ended.” Voters can answer either “Yes” to vote for the change, or “No” to maintain the current system of voting for a City Marshal. A sample ballot appears on Page 11 of this newspaper.

About half of the current city council and the Mayor have openly advocated for the change.

However, current City Marshal Bo Wells, who was appointed in August when former Marshal David Ford retired, has stated his opposition. In a recent social media post on Facebook, Mr. Wells said if the measure is rejected in November, he plans to run for a full term as City Marshal in April.

The matter has broader consequences than are evident on the surface. The city has also stated it will consider outsourcing the policing duties to the Howard County Sheriff’s Office. Changing the Fayette Police Department’s leadership from elected to appointed is the first step in implementing such a change.

This form of law enforcement is not uncommon in Missouri, particularly among small towns. New Franklin disbanded its city police department in April 2021 and has since contracted with the sheriff’s department for law enforcement coverage. And with the sheriff’s office located just one block off the downtown square in Fayette, such a transition here is not considered impractical.

Supporters of such a change suggest the city could save around $200,000 a year by contracting with the county and the sheriff’s department for city law enforcement. How those savings would be used has not been addressed, although continued demands for street improvements remain among residents here.

While contracting with the sheriff’s department has been mentioned, it has not been cited as the main reason for switching to an appointed Chief. Although some speculate that this is the principal driver for the city’s push.

Southeast Ward Alderman Grafton Cook, in a Letter to the Editor published in the October 15 Fayette Advertiser, stated such a transition was “on the table.”

“Turning over policing duties to the sheriff’s department is one option the city would have. Before those steps are taken any such arrangement will be the result of extensive negotiations resulting in a detailed contractual agreement,” wrote Mr. Cook, who has led the city’s charge for the transition to an appointed Chief.

Despite the passion on either side of the issue, Howard County Clerk Shelly Howell predicts fewer than 10 percent of Fayette’s approximately 1,300 registered voters will turn out for Tuesday’s election. As of Monday morning, 15 absentee ballots had been cast. Since this is the only matter on the ballot across the county, only registered Fayette residents will be allowed to vote. All ballots will be cast at the courthouse between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m. on Tuesday, November 4. The result is expected to be announced shortly after polls close. The Advertiser will report the outcome on its website and Facebook page as soon as votes are tabulated.