Elected Sheriffs vs. Appointed Police Chiefs: Who's in Charge?

By: Joel E. Gordon

When it comes to law enforcement, the roles of elected sheriffs and appointed police chiefs spark a lot of debate. They each have unique responsibilities, powers, and ways of connecting with the community. So, what’s the difference?

An elected sheriff is a local law enforcement official chosen by the voters. It’s like having your say in who patrols your streets. Sheriffs usually run for office, and their term can last from four to six years, depending on the state. Because they are elected, sheriffs often need to be in tune with the community's needs and concerns.

Being an elected official means they answer directly to the public. If they’re not doing their job well, people can vote them out. This connection can create a sense of accountability. Elected sheriffs can also enforce state laws, manage county jails, and handle community policing. In my home state of West Virginia, our county Sheriff’s also serve as the county treasurer overseeing tax collection and being a required signatory on all payments made by county commissioners.

On the flip side, an appointed police chief is hired by a city’s mayor or city council. This position isn’t decided by a public vote, which means the chief might not feel the same pressure to align with community opinions. Instead, they’re typically selected for their experience and qualifications in law enforcement albeit often highly political to fit within a certain political narrative.

Appointed police chiefs often focus on crime rates, departmental efficiency, and administrative duties rather than direct ties to the community. This structure allows for quicker decisions and policies because it’s less influenced by public opinion. However, it can lead to disconnects between the police department and the community it serves.

With elected sheriffs, accountability is straightforward. If they’re not performing, the community can voice their discontent at the polls. This aspect can lead to more community-oriented policing. People often feel more comfortable approaching an elected sheriff who they believe represents their interests.

Appointed police chiefs, while still accountable to the city government, may lack the same direct connection with the community. They may prioritize the mayor’s agenda over public opinion. This situation can lead to a sense of detachment from the very community they serve.

The way sheriffs and police chiefs engage with the community is a major point of distinction. Elected sheriffs tend to be more visible during community events. They might participate in local meetings, volunteer efforts, and even social media outreach. This visibility helps build trust and rapport.

Meanwhile, appointed police chiefs may focus on internal policies and crime statistics. While they certainly care about community safety, they might not have the same grassroots access or community-driven focus as elected sheriffs. This could mean a lack of understanding of local issues or concerns.

Leadership style is another area where sheriffs and police chiefs may differ. Elected sheriffs often adopt a more democratic approach, prioritizing community input. Their leadership can feel collaborative, with officers encouraged to engage with citizens.

Appointed police chiefs often operate under a more authoritative style. They might implement top-down policies aimed at efficiency and effectiveness. This can create a streamlined department, but it could also mean less room for community involvement in decision-making.

With all of the traditional differences between being in an elected versus appointed position of leadership, my own personal experience as a police chief was perhaps less than what could be considered conventional in many jurisdictions? I always was guided by my own moral compass. As a servant leader my primary focus and earned loyalty was to my officers and the community who entrusted us with their safety needs. At times when disagreements with the mayor or town council would occur, I stood my ground and made the case for what I knew to be in the best interest for the greater good.

So, when it comes to elected sheriffs versus appointed police chiefs, which is better? It depends on the community’s needs and values. Some may prefer the accountability and connection of an elected sheriff, believing that local voices matter most. Others might value the efficiency and expertise of an appointed chief, favoring what can be a more professional approach to law enforcement.

Ultimately, both roles are crucial for a safe and secure community. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of each can help citizens make informed decisions about their law enforcement leaders.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com