Are Vermont’s Police Reforms Necessary – or Just Risky?

Recent changes to Vermont’s statewide use-of-force policy have sparked debate over whether these reforms address a real need or are simply a response to national narratives fueled by media and activist pressure. Vermont has historically had low rates of reported excessive force, prompting questions about the necessity of these new regulations. This article examines the data, key policy changes, and potential risks to Vermont officers, as well as the broader context and key figures involved in enacting these reforms.

A Look at the Data

With almost half a million police interactions in Vermont each year, one might assume there’s a clear need for policies addressing use-of-force incidents. However, a closer look reveals that Vermont experiences relatively few issues with excessive force:

Use of Force is Rare in Vermont: Roughly 0.3% of police interactions in Vermont involve the use of force, equating to about 1,500 incidents annually (Vermont State Police). This rate is lower than in many other states, suggesting that Vermont’s law enforcement largely operates without excessive use-of-force incidents.
Civilian Complaints of Misconduct Are Minimal: Data from the Police Scorecard shows Vermont reported zero civilian complaints of police misconduct between 2016 and 2021 (Police Scorecard). Given hundreds of thousands of interactions annually, this statistic reflects a high level of public trust and professional conduct.

Key Changes in the Use-of-Force Policy

Despite Vermont’s relatively low rates of reported issues, the state enacted new use-of-force guidelines on April 5, 2023. These changes, initiated by the Vermont Criminal Justice Council and the state legislature, introduce stricter rules that are meant to enhance accountability. Here are the main components of the updated policy:

Proportional Use of Force: Officers must now ensure that any force used is the absolute minimum necessary. Previously, proportionality was a part of the policy, but the new language adds further restrictions.
Duty to Intervene: Officers are now required to intervene if they witness a colleague using excessive force. This standard increases internal accountability but also places additional pressure on officers to monitor each other’s actions.
Mandatory De-escalation: Officers are now expected to use de-escalation tactics whenever possible. This change, while positive in some respects, mandates tactics that might not always be realistic in fast-paced situations.
Enhanced Reporting Requirements: Officers must now document any use-of-force incidents in greater detail, adding layers of oversight.
Prohibition of High-Risk Restraints: The new policy reinforces bans on techniques such as chokeholds, except in extreme cases where deadly force would otherwise be justified.

The Influence of Media and Activist Narratives

The policy changes come amid a broader national conversation on police reform, intensified by high-profile incidents across the country. Even though these incidents have largely taken place outside Vermont, they have influenced perceptions of law enforcement, with national media and activist groups pushing for reform in nearly all states.

In Vermont, this pressure has been echoed by local advocacy groups and amplified by national narratives. Activist organizations have argued for universal reforms, suggesting that Vermont align itself with states experiencing more significant issues. While Vermont’s data does not indicate a crisis of excessive force, this narrative may have influenced policymakers to act, potentially to demonstrate solidarity with broader reform efforts.

Support FYIVT Today – Choose Your Impact! Name Your Own Price to Help Us Keep Fighting for Truth and Transparency. Every Contribution Makes a Difference!

Key Figures and Political Influence

Several key officials played a role in moving these policies forward. In particular:

Governor Phil Scott (Republican) has supported police reform efforts in recent years, including the broader push for accountability following national events. While Governor Scott has emphasized a balanced approach, the decision to implement these reforms aligns Vermont with other states enacting similar measures.
Attorney General Charity Clark (Democrat), who has been a vocal advocate for criminal justice reform, supported the changes as part of a larger commitment to community trust in law enforcement.
Members of the Vermont Legislature, including those from the Democrat-majority House and Senate, have been receptive to reform proposals. Democrat leaders, responding to constituent pressure, have argued that these measures are necessary to ensure that Vermont remains proactive, even if excessive force incidents are rare.

The Vermont Criminal Justice Council (VCJC), an appointed body responsible for police standards, worked alongside elected officials to draft and implement the new policies. While the VCJC comprises a mix of law enforcement and civilian representatives, their alignment with political pressures on reform reflects a responsiveness to national movements, even without significant local issues.

Were These Reforms Necessary?

For a state with one of the nation’s lowest rates of police misconduct, Vermont’s policy changes may seem more aligned with national optics than with Vermont’s actual needs. The limited number of excessive force complaints suggests a high degree of professionalism among Vermont’s officers, and many argue that the data did not justify sweeping changes.

The reforms may reflect a case of “we must do something” thinking, where policymakers feel compelled to act in the face of national issues, even if those issues aren’t reflected locally. By instituting policies that were not tailored specifically to Vermont, the state may risk undermining the public’s trust in the judgment and autonomy of its experienced officers.

New Risks and Challenges for Officers

With these policy changes, Vermont officers face new challenges that could potentially undermine their ability to respond effectively in high-stakes situations:

Higher Likelihood of Reprimand: The more restrictive standards on proportionality and use-of-force make it easier to second-guess an officer’s actions. This heightened scrutiny could lead to more frequent reprimands, even in cases where officers acted reasonably in fast-evolving situations.
Duty to Intervene Increases Interpersonal Pressure: Requiring officers to intervene with colleagues adds an interpersonal burden, especially in close-knit teams. This mandate can create hesitation or uncertainty during critical incidents, impacting teamwork and trust within departments.
De-escalation Mandates Could Slow Response Times: While de-escalation is a valuable skill, mandating it in nearly all situations could lead to hesitation in moments requiring quick action, potentially putting both officers and civilians at risk.
Increased Reporting Reduces Field Time: Detailed documentation requirements take time away from patrol and community engagement, indirectly affecting public safety by limiting officers’ presence in the field.
Potential for Increased Civilian Complaints: With heightened public awareness and a more detailed policy, civilians may feel encouraged to file complaints more frequently, even if no misconduct occurred. This could subject officers to more investigations, impacting morale and performance.

Conclusion: Balancing Reform with Practicality

While Vermont’s new use-of-force policies aim to improve transparency and accountability, their necessity in a state with low reported incidents of excessive force remains questionable. The push for reform appears driven largely by broader social and political trends rather than by local needs, raising concerns that these policies could inadvertently create new risks for Vermont’s officers.

Yet, it’s worth emphasizing that, by the numbers, Vermont’s police force has an impressive track record. With only 0.3% of almost half a million annual interactions involving any use of force and virtually zero civilian complaints reported from 2016 to 2021, Vermont’s law enforcement has demonstrated a high standard of professionalism and community trust. This success story, rarely highlighted in media or political circles, reflects a level of effectiveness and accountability that many states would strive to achieve.

For Vermont’s law enforcement, these changes introduce challenges that could impact the speed and safety of their responses. Whether these reforms ultimately prove beneficial will depend on how they’re implemented and whether they can adapt to the specific needs of Vermont’s communities and officers. In the meantime, Vermont’s law enforcement officers continue to uphold an admirable record, serving as a model of restraint and respect in policing.

Dave Soulia | FYIVT

#fyivt #VermontPoliceReform #UseOfForcePolicy #LawEnforcement

Support Us for as Little as $5 – Get In The Fight!!

Make a Big Impact with $25/month—Become a Premium Supporter!

Join the Top Tier of Supporters with $50/month—Become a SUPER Supporter!