The Town Meeting Hall in Danville, California

A town meeting is a form of direct democratic rule, used primarily in portions of the United States since the 17th century, in which most or all the members of a community come together to legislate policy and budgets for local government.

The term has more recently been expanded to cover public meetings that draw people in a geographic area to discuss issues but not vote on any legislative or administrative action. Notably, the term is commonly used by politicians in the United States to describe forums at which voters can ask questions.

In the United States[link]

Town meeting is a form of local government practiced in the U.S. region of New England since colonial times, and in some western states since at least the late 19th century.^[1] Typically conducted by New England towns, town meeting can also refer to meetings of other governmental bodies, such as school districts or water districts. While the uses and laws vary from state to state, the general form is for residents of the town or school district to gather once a year and act as a legislative body, voting on operating budgets, laws and other matters for the community's operation over the following 12 months.

In 1854, American author, poet, and political thinker Henry David Thoreau said, in a speech entitled "Slavery in Massachusetts":

When, in some obscure country town, the farmers come together to a special town-meeting, to express their opinion on some subject which is vexing the land, that, I think, is the true Congress, and the most respectable one that is ever assembled in the United States.^[2]

The Puritans, who believed in Congregationalist church governance, established town meetings In New England when they established the various New England colonies.

Its usage in the English language can also cause confusion. Town meeting is both an event, as in "Freetown had its town meeting last Tuesday" and an entity, as in "Last Tuesday, Town Meeting decided to repave Howland Road." Starting with Jimmy Carter's presidential campaign in 1976, "town meeting" has also been used as a label for any moderated discussion group in which a large audience is invited. To avoid confusion, this sort of event is often called a "town hall meeting."

Connecticut[link]

Connecticut shares the Town Meeting form of government used by many other New England communities. They differ from Massachusetts and the northern tier of states in being more tightly bound to the published agenda—in Connecticut, the Town Meeting may discuss, but not alter, an article placed before them; nor may they place new items on the agenda. If a Town Meeting rejects a budget, a new Town Meeting must be called to consider the next proposed budget. State Law allows the Board of Selectmen to adopt an estimated tax rate and continue operating based on the previous budget in the event a Town Meeting hasn't adopted a new budget in time.

They also do not exercise the scope of legislative powers as is typically seen in Massachusetts; for example, while many Massachusetts towns adopt and modify land-use and building zoning regulations at Town Meeting, in Connecticut the Town Meeting would have "adopted zoning" as a concept for the town, however the actual writing and adopting of specific regulations fall to an elected Planning & Zoning Board created by the adoption of zoning.

A moderator is chosen at each meeting. Meetings are typically held in school auditoriums, however they may be moved to larger venues as needed. Town meetings can physically meet in another town if necessary to find a proper space to host the attendance; and they have been known to take advantage of a pleasant spring evening to adjourn outside to conduct business. Votes are taken by voice, and if close by show of hands. Meetings on controversial topics are often adjourned to a referendum conducted by machine vote on a date in the future. Such adjournment may come from the floor of the meeting, or by a petition for a paper or machine ballot filed before the meeting.

In towns with an Open Town Meeting, all registered voters of a town, and all persons owning at least $1,000 of taxable property, are eligible to participate in and vote at Town Meetings, with the exception of the election of officials. Representative Town Meetings used by some larger towns consist solely of a large number of members elected to office. Some towns utilize a so-called Financial Town Meeting, where the an Open Town Meeting exists with limited jurisdiction to only vote on financial affairs and the town's legislative powers have been vested in a Town Council.

Maine[link]

In Maine, the town meeting system originated during the period when Maine was a district of Massachusetts. Most cities and towns operate under the town meeting form of government or a modified version of it. Maine annual town meetings traditionally are held in March. Special town meetings also may be called from time to time.

The executive agency of town government is an elected, part-time board, known as the Board of Selectmen or Select Board, having three, five or seven members. Between sessions the board of selectmen interprets the policy set at Town Meeting and is assigned numerous duties including: approving all town non-school expenditures, authorizing highway construction and repair, serving as town purchasing agent for non-school items, issuing licenses and overseeing the conduct of all town activities. Often the part-time selectmen also serve as town assessors, overseers of the poor as well as road commissioners. Generally, there are other elected town officers whose duties are specified in law. These may include clerk, assessors, tax collector, treasurer, school committee, constables, and others.

In 1927, the town of Camden adopted a special charter and became the first Maine town to apply the manager concept to the town meeting-selectmen framework. Under this system, the manager is administrative head of town government, responsible to the select board for the administration of all departments under its control. The manager's duties include acting as purchasing agent, seeing that laws and ordinances are enforced, making appointments and removals, and fixing the compensation of appointees. (See also: Council-manager government)

From 1927 to 1939, eleven other Maine towns adopted special act town meeting-selectmen-manager charters similar to the Camden charter. Today, 135 Maine towns have the town meeting-selectmen-manager system, while 209 use the town meeting-selectman system.

Massachusetts[link]

Faneuil Hall in Boston

I am more and more convinced that, with reference to any public question, it is more important to know what the country thinks of it than what the city thinks. The city does not think much. On any moral question, I would rather have the opinion of Boxboro than of Boston and New York put together. When the former speaks, I feel as if somebody had spoken, as if humanity was yet, and a reasonable being had asserted its rights — as if some unprejudiced men among the country's hills had at length turned their attention to the subject, and by a few sensible words redeemed the reputation of the race. When, in some obscure country town, the farmers come together to a special town-meeting, to express their opinion on some subject which is vexing the land, that, I think, is the true Congress, and the most respectable one that is ever assembled in the United States.

—Henry David Thoreau, ^[3]

Two forms of town meeting government[link]

Open town meeting[link]

In Massachusetts, towns with fewer than 6,000 residents may only adopt an open town meeting form of government. Massachusetts towns with 6,000 or more residents may optionally adopt a representative town meeting form of government.^[4] The Board of Selectmen summons the town meeting into existence by issuing the warrant, which is the list of items—known as articles—to be voted on, with descriptions of each article. The Moderator officiates the meeting by reading each article, explaining it, and making sure the rules of parliamentary procedure are followed, interprets voice votes and counts other votes. The Finance Committee or Ways and Means Committee makes recommendations on articles dealing with money, and often drafts the proposed budget. The Town Clerk serves as the clerk of the meeting by recording its results. Town Counsel makes legal recommendations on all articles of the warrant, to ensure town meeting is acting lawfully. All registered voters are free to attend and vote on any and all articles.

Representative town meeting[link]

Massachusetts Towns having at least 6,000 residents may adopt a Representative Town Meeting system through the normal charter-change process. Representative Town Meetings function largely the same as an Open Town Meeting, except that not all registered voters can vote. The townspeople instead elect Town Meeting Members by precinct to represent them and to vote on the issues for them much like a town council. Depending on population, a town may have anywhere from 50 to 240 Town Meeting Members. Framingham, the largest town in the commonwealth by population, has 216 representatives in Town Meeting, twelve from each precinct. Saugus, with 50 town meeting members^[when?], is the smallest representative town meeting in Massachusetts.^{[citation needed]} In recent years, the number of RTMs in Massachusetts is declining to now just over 35 with the loss of Winthrop and Randolph as the most recent.^{[citation needed]}

Annual town meetings[link]

Annual Town Meetings are held in the spring, and may also be known as the Annual Budget Meeting. They were required to be held between February 1 and May 31, but Chapter 85 of the Acts of 2008 extended this window of time to June 30. (Town fiscal years start on July 1.) At this meeting, the town takes care of any housecleaning it has left before the end of the current fiscal year, and prepares itself to enter the new fiscal year by approving a budget. It may also vote on non-budgetary issues on the warrant, including the town's general and zoning bylaws.

An article may be placed on the warrant by the Selectmen, sometimes at the request of town departments, or by a petition signed by at least ten registered voters of the town.

Special town meetings[link]

Special Town Meetings are held whenever necessary, usually to deal with financial or other pertinent issues that develop between Annual Town Meetings. They function the same as an Annual Town Meeting, only the number of signatures required on a petition rises to 100. While the Selectmen generally call such a meeting, voters may call one through petition, and the number of signatures required on a petition to call a Special Town Meeting is 200 or 20% of the registered voters, whichever number is lower. The Selectmen have 45 days from the date of receiving such a petition to hold a Special Town Meeting. They are extremely important in finding something to do with the towns issues.

Joint/regional town meetings[link]

Joint Town Meetings are an extremely rare form of town meeting. When two or more towns share an operating budget for something, the governing body of that entity will typically issue each town an assessment for its operation. The town then includes its assessment as part of its budget.

If Town Meeting in one town votes to approve its assessment based on the figures provided, and Town Meeting in another town votes a lesser figure than it was assessed, the disagreement becomes problematic. (For example, if X-town and Y-town run a high school together, and the total operating cost of the high school is $4,500,000, and X-town sends 51% of the school's students, X-town would be assessed $2,295,000 and Y-town would be assessed $2,205,000. An issue arises when X-town votes $2,295,000 and Y-town only votes $2,100,000.)

If the issue cannot be resolved, the governing body may call a meeting of all registered voters from all towns involved: a Joint Town Meeting. The action of the Joint Town Meeting is binding for all involved communities. When three or more towns are involved, the name often changes from Joint Town Meeting to Regional Town Meeting.

Case study[link]

In 2003, the communities of Freetown and Lakeville, Massachusetts held their annual town meetings and voted on the budget for the Freetown-Lakeville Regional School District as part of those meetings. Freetown voters approved a budget that reduced their contribution by $100,000 from what the Regional School Committee asked for, thus requiring Lakeville to lower their contribution proportionally. Lakeville voters instead approved the amount the Regional School Committee asked for, which would require Freetown to go back and approve the extra $100,000.

When the towns could not agree, the Regional School Committee, as governing body of the Freetown-Lakeville Regional School District, called a joint town meeting of voters from Freetown and Lakeville to agree on a single regional school budget. The meeting voted in favor of the amount originally requested, which required Freetown to give the additional $100,000 it had held back.

• Lakeville demands more Freetown funding A newspaper article describing the joint town meeting.

Cities calling themselves towns[link]

The Massachusetts Constitution (in Amendment LXXXIX, which governs the respective powers of municipalities and the state legislature) makes a distinction between a "city form of government" and a "town form of government". In recent years, a number of communities have chosen to adopt a home-rule charter under this Amendment which specifies a city form of government while retaining the style "Town of X," calling their legislative bodies "Town Council," and so on. (The Constitution does not require any specific nomenclature.) In special legislation, these places are sometimes described as "the city known as the town of X".

The Town Meeting form of government is a mandatory part of being considered a town under state law; cities do not have town meetings. However, as noted, the official style of a city or town is defined in its charter, and there is no legal barrier to cities calling themselves "town" or vice versa. As a result, not all of the municipalities that are entitled Town of _____ have a Town Meeting legislative body. (Only communities with a population of at least 12,000 may adopt a city form of government.)

Common practice distinguishes between a "town meeting" (with an article), which may refer to any such gathering, even if municipal business is not the subject, and "Town Meeting" (never an article), which always refers to the legislative governing body of a town.

New Hampshire[link]

In New Hampshire, towns, cities, unincorporated places and villages, and school districts have the option of two main types of annual meeting: Traditional meetings, or ballot-vote meetings that are known informally as "SB 2" or "Senate Bill 2." Each political subdivision can choose their form of meeting.

Traditional town meetings[link]

Traditional Town Meetings, or Open Meetings, are held annually on the second Tuesday of March to choose town officers and the transaction of all other town business. Town selectmen are also permitted to call special town meetings as warranted, although these must be approved by a judge if they involve budgetary expenditures or changes. Town meetings are prohibited, by state law, from being held on the biennial election day, which is typically held in November to elect county, state and national officials.

A town moderator is allowed under state law to adjourn a meeting that has run for a very long period and reconvene it at a later date, usually one week from the date of the meeting, and usually in the same location, in order to finish the town's business.

Official ballot referendums (SB 2)[link]

The SB 2 form of government was instituted by the state legislature in 1995 because of concerns that modern lifestyles had made it difficult for people to attend traditional town meetings. Residents vote in an SB 2 election at a polling place throughout the day. They may also vote by absentee ballot. Municipalities that have adopted the SB 2 form of government may switch back to the traditional town meeting form by a 3/5 majority vote.

Under SB 2, a first session, called a "Deliberative Session," is held about a month prior to the town election. This session is similar in many ways to the traditional town meeting. However, unlike the town meeting, while the wording and dollar amounts of proposed ballot measures may be amended, no actual voting on the merits of the proposals takes place. The second session, held on a set election day, is when issues such as the town's budget and other measures, known as warrant articles, are voted upon.

When adopting SB 2, towns or school districts may hold elections on the second Tuesday in March, the second Tuesday in April, or the second Tuesday in May. The election dates may be changed by majority vote. If a vote is taken to approve the change of the local elections, the date becomes effective the following year.

In 2002, according to the University of New Hampshire Center for Public Policy studies, 171 towns in New Hampshire had traditional town meeting, while 48 had SB 2. Another 15 municipalities, most of them incorporated cities, had no annual meeting. The study found that 102 school districts had traditional town meeting, 64 had SB2 meeting and 10 had no annual meeting.

Because traditional-meeting communities tend to be smaller, only one-third of the state's population was governed by traditional town meetings in 2002, and only 22 percent by traditional school-district meetings.

Official ballot town council[link]

The Official Ballot Town Council is a variant form of the Town Council, in which certain items are to be placed on the ballot to be voted on by the registered voters. This process mimics the SB 2 process, except that the Town Council makes the determination of what items will go on the ballot.

Budgetary town meeting[link]

The Budgetary Town Meeting is a variation of the Open Meeting, but only the annual town operating budget as presented by the governing body can be voted on by the registered voters. When a town charter provides for a Budgetary Town Meeting also must establish the procedures for the transfer of funds among various departments, funds, accounts and agencies as may be necessary during the year.

Representative town meeting[link]

State law also allows for a Representative Town Meeting, similar to that of a Town Council, although as of 2006 the practice is not used by a town or school district in New Hampshire. Voters elect a small number of residents to act as the legislative body instead of them, however no town in the state has done so. Representative Town Meetings follow the same procedure and address the same issues as traditional town meetings, except they cannot consider matters which state law or the charter states must be placed on the official ballot of the town.

Moderator[link]

Moderators are elected to two-year terms on even years in towns and are elected in city wards at every other city election. The moderator's duties include presiding over town meetings, regulating the business thereof, deciding questions of order, making public declarations of each vote passed, and prescribing rules of proceeding which may be altered by the town as need.

The moderator also has the authority to postpone and reschedule the deliberative session or voting day of the meeting to another reasonable date, place, and time certain in the case of a weather emergency in which the moderator reasonably believes the roads to be hazardous or unsafe.

New York[link]

Town meetings were the rule in New York from the colonial period into the 20th century. They were typically held between February 1 and May 1 of each year primarily for the election of town officials but were also empowered to set "rules for fences and for impounding animals," supporting the poor, raising taxes, and to "determine any other question lawfully submitted to them." In the late 1890s the state legislature shifted the meetings - by this time no more than town elections - to biennial to conform to the pattern of federal, state, and municipal elections in the state's cities.^[5] It also permitted, and later directed, town meetings to be held in November. That process was not complete until the 1920s. Laws adopted in 1932 for the first time refer to "Biennial town elections," stating that these were "a substitute for a town meeting …, and a reference in any law to a town meeting or special town meeting shall be construed as reference to a town election …".^[6] The state's school districts (independent units with taxing powers) voted on budgets and capital levies and elected school board members in town-meeting style until the late 1950s.

Rhode Island[link]

Due to a change in the state's constitution, Rhode Island municipalities have a greater degree of home rule compared to the other New England states. Like Connecticut, a few towns utilize a so-called Financial Town Meeting, where an Open Town Meeting exists with limited jurisdiction to only vote on financial affairs and the town's legislative powers have been vested in a Town Council. The direct democracy tradition is now uncommon in Rhode Island.

Vermont[link]

The Town House of the small Vermont town of Marlboro was built in 1822 to be used for town meetings, which had previously been held in private homes. It is still in use today.

Town Meeting Day (the first Tuesday in March) is a state holiday. Most organized towns operate under the general statutes requiring an annual town meeting on that day or, optionally, on preceding days if the voters so choose. The purpose of town meeting is to elect municipal officers, approve annual budgets and conduct any other business. All cities and some towns in Vermont operate under charters instead of general legislation (see special legislation). The cities and chartered towns, except for South Burlington, are required by the terms of their charters to hold an annual town meeting, on Town Meeting Day. Many towns vote on matters of substance (e.g. budgets, elected officials, etc.) by secret ballot (also known as Australian ballot). However, there is no state law that requires towns to vote by Australian ballot; several towns still conduct all business "from the floor".

Cities and towns are governed by either a city council or a selectboard. They are fully empowered to act on most issues and are generally referred to as the municipality's legislative body. But all town budgets (and those of other independent taxing authorities) must be approved by plebiscite; explaining the local government's budget request to the voters is the principal business of Town Meeting. Voters at Town Meeting may also vote on non-binding resolutions, and may place items on the ballot for the following year's meeting.

There is no general requirement for chartered municipalities to observe town meeting or to put their budgets to plebiscite. When the Town of South Burlington was re-chartered as the City of South Burlington in 1971, the new charter provided for city elections in April and required only budget increases of 10% or more per annum to be placed before voters. No other municipality has been granted such a charter by the legislature, and there is strong sentiment against making future exceptions.

Employers in the state often give their employees time off, or at least give the employees the option of leaving early/coming in late, in order to attend their home town's Town Meeting. Universities often also give their students the day off from class so that they may go to Town Meeting to learn more about local issues and government.

Vermont gives state employees the day off on town meeting day. Private employees may also take an unpaid day off under most circumstances. Students over 18 may attend and not be declared truant.^[7][8]

Moderator[link]

Moderators are elected to one-year terms in towns. The moderator's duties include reviewing the "warning" (published agenda) for the town meeting, presiding over town meetings, deciding questions of order, making public declarations of each vote passed, and prescribing rules of proceeding.^[9]

Other states[link]

Towns in several western states and counties also practice town meeting, though generally with more limited powers. Michigan was the first western state to adopt the town meeting system, but it was initially very restricted in its function. Minnesota has a well established tradition.

Europe[link]

Basque Country[link]

The best-known example of the town meeting system of government was to be found in the Basque Country of northern Spain in the Middle Ages. Known as the anteiglesia (literally "in front of the church" from the Latin ante - and not anti) all the residents of a town would meet outside the door of the largest church and vote on local matters. They would also elect a sindico to represent them in the regional assembly. The village or town was divided into cofradías, which dealt with day-to-day administration in each of the town's parishes.

The system was revived in the municipality of Iurreta, Biscay in 1990.

Switzerland[link]

Town meetings are the usual legislative body of the smaller municipalities of Switzerland, that is of approximately 90% of all Swiss municipalities. The meetings are usually held twice a year. They must not be confused with the Landsgemeinde, the meeting that functions as legislative body in certain cantons of Switzerland.

Within religious communities[link]

The Bahá'í Faith has a Nineteen Day Feast which encourages all members of the geographic community in good standing to attend for prayers, administrative discussion, and socializing. This meeting is one component of the Bahá'í Administrative Order (which is held up as a model for secular society to consider implementing some of its features), and the meeting is considered by Bahá'ís to be an example of grass-roots democracy.

See also[link]

• Open Town Meeting
• Representative town meeting
• New England town

References[link]

Notes

Further reading

• Bryan, Frank M., Real Democracy: The New England Town Meeting and How it Works, Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2004.
• Robinson, Donald. Town Meeting: Practicing Democracy in Rural New England (University of Massachusetts Press; 2011) 344 pages; analyzes the rocky but productive process of town-meeting democracy in Ashfield, Mass., a community of just under 2,000 in the Berkshires.
• Zuckerman, Michael. "The Social Context of Democracy in Massachusetts," William and Mary Quarterly (1968) 25:523-544 in JSTOR

External links[link]

• Relevant Minnesota statute
• Civil Government in the United States by John Fiske, 1904

Maine

• UMaine Margaret Chase Smith Center for Public Policy
• Maine Municipal Association

Massachusetts

• Citizen's Guide to Town Meetings prepared by William Francis Galvin, Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth.
• An example of a Special Town Meeting warrant.

New Hampshire

• NH RSA Chapter 40: Government of Town Meeting
• N.H. Center for Public Policy Studies report on SB2

Bob McCarthy

Bob McCarthy in February 2012
Personal information
Born	5 August 1944 Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Playing information
Position	Second-row
Club
Years	Team	Pld	T	G	FG	P
1963–78	South Sydney	211	100	0	1	301
1976–77	Canterbury-Bankstn.	40	19	0	0	57
	Total	251	119	0	1	358
Representative
Years	Team	Pld	T	G	FG	P
1969–74	New South Wales	11	7	0	0	21
1969–74	Australia	15	7	0	1	22
Coaching information
Club
Years	Team	Gms	W	D	L	W%
1980–83	Souths (Brisbane)	78	53	2	23	68
1988–90	Gold Coast Giants	66	15	3	48	23
1975–1994	South Sydney	9	1	0	8	11
	Total	153	69	5	79	45

Bob McCarthy MBE (born 1944 Sydney, New South Wales) is an Australian former rugby league footballer and coach. He played for the South Sydney Rabbitohs, Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs, New South Wales and for the Australian national side. He later coached in Brisbane, taking Souths Magpies to a premiership in 1981 and coaching the Gold Coast-Tweed Giants upon their entry to the Winfield Cup. in Since 2001 he has been the Chairman of both the Australian^[1] and NSW state selection panels.

Biography[link]

Career highlights[link]

A fast and strong second-row forward McCarthy played ten Tests for Australia and five matches in two World Cups. He made the 1973 Kangaroo Tour and two tours of New Zealand. He played 211 first grade games for Souths (1963–1975 and 1978), scoring 100 tries. He played in three grand final victories (1967, 1970 and 1971) and in two losing grand finals (1965 and 1969).

Club career[link]

Born in inner city Surry Hills, New South Wales in Sydney, McCarthy was a South Sydney junior with the Moore Park Club and made his first grade debut in 1963. In 1965 he was in the team of young Rabbitohs who challenged St George in the Grand Final in front of a record breaking crowd of 78,065 at the Sydney Cricket Ground. Along with McCarthy the nucleus of this side was John O'Neill, Eric Simms, Mike Cleary and John Sattler who went on to feature in Australian representative teams for the next six years and who would help create a golden period for South Sydney at the end of the 60s and in the early years of the next decade.

The advent of the four tackle rule in 1967 was tailor-made for the athletic, barrell-chested McCarthy and his coach Clive Churchill gave him license to stand wide in attack to make best use of his tank-like charges.

One of the most spectacular tries in Grand Final history came from such positional play when just before halftime in the 1967 decider against Canterbury McCarthy intercepted a pass out wide from Canterbury hooker Cliff Brown and ran the length of the field to score and to take the Rabbitohs to a two point lead which they didn't give up by game's end.

He missed Souths 1968 Grand Final victory, played in the 1969 loss to the Balmain Tigers and was a member of the 1970 and 1971 premiership sides. It was primarily McCarthy's retribution which saw Manly's John Bucknell leave the field before half-time in the 1970 Grand Final after Bucknell had earlier broken the jaw of Souths captain John Sattler and the Souths forwards had regrouped to protect and avenge their skipper. In the 1971 Grand Final against St George McCarthy made a break late in the game and gave the inside pass to Ron Coote which resulted in the final try to seal Souths 16–10 win.

In 1975 McCarthy became only the second forward in the history of the game after Frank Burge to surpass the 100 career try tally.

McCarthy moved to Canterbury for the 1976 and 1977 seasons where he played at Prop forward and played 37 games for the club helping them to the semi-finals in both years. He returned to the Rabbitohs in 1978 to finish his career in a brief five game season ended by injury.

Representative career[link]

Bobby McCarthy first tasted representative football in 1964 scoring two tries for a New South Wales Colts side against a touring French team.

He had to wait until the 1969 tour of New Zealand before he made a national senior squad but thereafter, for the next five years barring injury, he was one of the first players selected for Test and World Cup squads.

He played in both Tests of the 1969 New Zealand tour. In the 1970 domestic Ashes series against Great Britain he appeared in the third Test and later that year in the World Cup in England where he played in all four of Australia's games including the victorious final.

He played three Tests in 1971–72 against New Zealand and appeared in one match in the 1972 World Cup in which campaign he was competing for the second row spots with his club teammates Paul Sait and Gary Stevens.

McCarthy was named as vice-captain to Graeme Langlands on the '73 Kangaroo Tour and his sole honour as Australia's Test captain was in the vital second Test in Leeds which the Kangaroos needed to win to keep the series alive. McCarthy scored a try early in the second half to help win the game but on the frozen ground he dislocated his shoulder in the process and his tour was over. He scored three tries in his two Test and 4 minor tour match appearances but had played a pivotal role in Australia's successful Ashes campaign.

In 1974 Test series at home against Great Britain, McCarthy was selected in the deciding 3rd game in a veteran pack including his old Souths teammates Coote, Stevens, and John O'Neill and captained and coached by Langlands. The old war-horses won the match 22–18 to retain the Ashes and McCarthy was one of the players who chaired Langlands from the field and who along with eight others were unknowingly making their farewell Test appearance.

Accolades[link]

He was honoured with his MBE in 1977 for services to rugby league, only the second player after Langlands to be so honoured while still playing.

In 2004 he was named by Souths in their South Sydney Dream Team,^[2] consisting of 17 players and a coach representing the club from 1908 through to 2004.

In February 2008, McCarthy was named in the list of Australia's 100 Greatest Players (1908–2007) which was commissioned by the NRL and ARL to celebrate the code's centenary year in Australia.^[3]

Post-playing[link]

McCarthy commenced coaching with Brisbane Souths in 1980 taking them to the Brisbane Rugby League Grand Final that year and to premiership victory in 1981. He was the inaugural coach of the Gold Coast Seagulls in 1988 and for that club's first three seasons. In 1994 he was briefly the coach of the South Sydney Rabbitohs before he stood aside for health reasons.

Since 2001 he has been the Chairman of both the Australian and NSW State of Origin selection panels.

1st Grade matches played[link]

Sources[link]

• Whiticker, Alan (2004) Captaining the Kangaroos, New Holland, Sydney
• Andrews, Malcolm (2006) The ABC of Rugby League Austn Broadcasting Corpn, Sydney

Footnotes[link]

Motorcycle cop redirects here.

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2009)

This article includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (July 2009)

German state police officer in Hamburg

A Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer in the force's distinctive dress uniform.

Mounted Tourist-Police officers in Petra, Jordan.

A group of Garda officers in the Republic of Ireland.

A motor officer patrolling in Arizona on a motorcycle.

A police officer (also known as a policeman or policewoman, and constable in some forces, particularly in the United Kingdom^[1][2] and other Commonwealth nations) is a warranted employee of a police force. In the United States, "officer" is the formal name of the lowest police rank; in many other countries "officer" is a generic term not specifying a particular rank, and the lowest rank is often "constable". Police officers are generally charged with the apprehension of criminals and the prevention and detection of crime, and the maintenance of public order. Police officers may be sworn to an oath, and have the power to arrest people and detain them for a limited time, along with other duties and powers.

Some police officers may also be trained in special duties, such as counter-terrorism, surveillance, child protection, VIP protection, and investigation techniques into major crime, including fraud, rape, murder and drug trafficking.

Duties and functions[link]

Responsibilities of a police officer are varied, and may differ greatly from within one political context to another. Typical duties relate to keeping the peace, law enforcement, protection of people and property, and the investigation of crimes. Officers are expected to respond to a variety of situations that may arise while they are on duty. Rules and guidelines dictate how an officer should behave within the community, and in many contexts restrictions are placed on what the uniformed officer wears. In some countries, rules and procedures dictate that a police officer is obliged to intervene in a criminal incident, even if they are off-duty. Police officers in nearly all countries retain their lawful powers, while off duty.^[3]

In the community[link]

In the majority of Western legal systems, the major role of the police is to maintain order, keeping the peace through surveillance of the public, and the subsequent reporting and apprehension of suspected violators of the law. They also function to discourage crimes through high-visibility policing, and most police forces have an investigative capability. Police have the legal authority to arrest, usually granted by magistrates. Police officers also respond to emergency calls, along with routine community policing.

Police are often used as an emergency service and may provide a public safety function at large gatherings, as well as in emergencies, disasters, search and rescue situations, and Road Traffic Collisions. To provide a prompt response in emergencies, the police often coordinate their operations with fire and emergency medical services. In some countries, individuals serve jointly as police officers as well as firefighters (creating the role of Fire Police) or paramedics. In many countries, there is a common emergency service number that allows the police, firefighters, or medical services to be summoned to an emergency. Some countries, such as the United Kingdom have outlined command procedures, for the use in major emergencies or disorder. The Gold Silver Bronze command structure is a system set up to improve communications between ground based officers and the control room, typically, Bronze Commander would be a senior officer on the ground, coordinating the efforts in the center of the emergency, Silver Commanders would be positioned in an 'Incident Control Room' erected to improve better communications at the scene, and a Gold Commander who would be in the Control Room.

Police are also responsible for reprimanding minor offenders by issuing citations which typically may result in the imposition of fines, particularly for violations of traffic law. Traffic enforcement is often and effectively accomplished by police officers on motorcycles—called motor officers, these officers refer to the motorcycles they ride on duty as simply motors. Police are also trained to assist persons in distress, such as motorists whose car has broken down and people experiencing a medical emergency. Police are typically trained in basic first aid such as CPR.

In addition, some park rangers are commissioned as law enforcement officers and carry out a law-enforcement role within national parks and other back-country wilderness and recreational areas, whereas Military police perform law enforcement functions within the military.

Entry and promotion qualifications[link]

In most countries, candidates for the police force must have completed some formal education.^{[citation needed]} Increasing numbers of people are joining the police force who possess tertiary education^{[citation needed]} and in response to this many police forces have developed a "fast-track" scheme whereby those with university degrees spend two to three years as a Constable before receiving promotion to higher ranks, such as Sergeants or Inspectors. (Officers who work within investigative divisions or plainclothes are not necessarily of a higher rank but merely have different duties.)^{[citation needed]} Police officers are also recruited from those with experience in the military or security services. In the United States state laws may codify state-wide qualification standards regarding age, education, criminal record, and training but in other places requirements are set by local police agencies. Each local Police agency has different requirements.

Officers of the Polizia Municipale from Piacenza, Italy

Promotion is not automatic and usually requires the candidate to pass some kind of examination, interview board or other selection procedure. Although promotion normally includes an increase in salary, it also brings with it an increase in responsibility and for most, an increase in administrative paperwork. There is no stigma attached to this, as experienced line patrol officers are highly regarded.

Dependent upon each agency, but generally after completing two years of service, officers may also apply for specialist positions, such as detective, police dog handler, mounted police officer, motorcycle officer, water police officer, or firearms officer (in countries where police are not routinely armed).

In some countries such as in Singapore, police ranks may also be supplemented through conscription, similar to national service in the military. Qualifications may thus be relaxed or enhanced depending on the target mix of conscripts. In Singapore, for example, conscripts face tougher physical requirements in areas such as eyesight, but are less stringent with minimum academic qualification requirements. Some police officers join as volunteers, who again may do so via differing qualification requirements.

Police pay[link]

This section requires expansion.

In some societies, police officers are paid relatively well compared to other occupations; their pay depends on what rank they are within their police force and how many years they've served.^[4]

Occupational hazards[link]

Line of duty deaths[link]

Memorial to a fallen police officer at the Texas Department of Public Safety Houston Webster Office in Houston^[5]

Line of duty deaths are deaths which occur while an officer is conducting his or her appointed duties. Despite the increased risk of being a victim of a homicide, automobile accidents are the most common cause of officer deaths. Officers are more likely to be involved in traffic accidents because of their large amount of time spent conducting vehicle patrols, or directing traffic, as well as their work outside their vehicles alongside or on the roadway, or in dangerous pursuits. Officers killed by suspects make up a smaller proportion of deaths. In the U.S. in 2005, 156 line of duty deaths were recorded of which 44% were from assaults on officers, 35% vehicle related (only 3% during vehicular pursuits) and the rest from other causes: heart attacks during arrests/foot pursuits, diseases contracted either from suspects' body fluids or, more rarely, from emergency blood transfusions received after being in motor vehicle accidents, shot or stabbed, accidental gun discharges, falls, and drownings.^[6]

Police officers who die in the line of duty, especially those who die from the actions of suspects or in accidents or heart attacks, are often given elaborate funerals, attended by large numbers of fellow officers. Their families may also be entitled to special pensions. Fallen officers are often remembered in public memorials, such as the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial in the U.S., the National Police Memorial in the U.K. and the Scottish Police Memorial, at the Scottish Police College.

In the United Kingdom, in the 10 years from April 2000 there were 143 line of duty deaths: 54 in road accidents travelling to or from duty, 46 in road accidents on duty, 23 from natural causes on duty, 15 from criminal acts, and 5 in other accidents.^[7] (In the United Kingdom, police do not normally carry firearms.)

The Singapore Police Force registered just over 100 deaths in a century up to the year 2000. There have been 28 New Zealand police officers killed by criminal act since 1890.^[8] Despite perceived dangers, policing has never been listed above number ten as one of the most dangerous jobs in the U.S. In terms of deaths per capita, driver-sales work such as food delivery is a more dangerous profession than being a police officer^[9].

Work stress[link]

Indicators[link]

The actual presence of stress in police work is well documented and evidenced by certain statistics. Researchers typically use suicide, divorce and alcoholism rates as three key indexes of stress in a group of people.^[10] These factors paint a compelling picture of police officers demonstrating signs of significant stress, for example:

• A study in the United States, by National Surveillance of Police Suicide Study (NSOPS), showed 141 suicides in 2008 and 143 in 2009. This yields a suicide rate of 17/100,000, a figure that holds up under scrutiny and is consistent with CDC/NOMS data.^[11] The overall suicide rate in the United States was 11.3 suicide deaths per 100,000 people.^[12] There is some speculation or controversy that this official rate may understate the actual rate as it is often other police officers that report facts that lead to a cause of death determination, and death benefits, institutional image, and other factors may be incentives to misreport incident facts. It is speculated that some suicides are reported by fellow officers as accidents or as deaths in the line of duty perpetrated by unknown assailants. Also, many jurisdictions simply don't keep suicide statistics. Even though the information is incomplete, the available statistics suggest that police officers are more likely to commit suicide than the general population. However there is still controversy in the interpretation of these statistics. When comparisons are made within age, gender, and racial cohorts, the differences are much less dramatic.^[13][14] Although suicides may be notably more prevalent among police, it is not clear whether police suicides are the result of work stress or the consequence of other variables, such as the influence of a subculture of violence^[15]
• Police officers are much more likely to experience interpersonal relationship problems. Relationship problems are most dramatically demonstrated by the divorce rate among police officers, which is usually reported as being the second highest of all occupations. However in a 2009 study, the divorce rates of law enforcement personnel were compared with the rates for other occupations, where data was analyzed from the 2000 U.S. Census. The results of the analysis indicate that the divorce rate for law enforcement personnel is lower than that of the general population, even after controlling for demographic and other job-related variables.^[16] The propensity to domestic violence is also thought to be higher for police officers than the general population, though the statistics are very fuzzy and controversial. Police officers also seem to have relationship problems at work, typically with superiors or with political oversight, though the evidence is largely anecdotal and controversial.
• Alcoholism is considered another aberrant statistic for police officers. Although the statistics are fuzzy, clinically treated alcohol addiction rates are usually calculated to be about twice as high for police officers than for the general population in the United States. In contrast, statistics documenting alcohol abuse are less precise. Rates for arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol, or DUI or DWI, are somewhat higher for police officers than for other drivers, but the statistics are not widely trusted outside of the insurance industry since it is other police officers that make DUI arrests. Some departments and even some individual officers tend to hold police officers to a higher behavioral and ethical standard while others will recognize a 'blue line' behind which those within the 'brotherhood' are not held to the same standards as the rest of society. Despite the controversies in the interpretation of the statistics, it is generally considered evident that police officers are more susceptible to alcohol abuse than other occupations. The same conclusions are usually made regarding the police abuse of other substances, though the statistics are even less accurate, and even though the higher rates of substance abuse may be due in part to the more ready access to drugs and the more permissive atmosphere 'behind the blue line' rather than to occupational stresses.

Hans Selye, the foremost researcher in stress in the world, said that police work is "the most stressful occupation in America even surpassing the formidable stresses of air traffic control."^[10]

Other researchers, though, claim that police officers are more psychologically healthy than the general population. Police officers are increasingly more educated, more likely to engage in a regular program of exercise and to consume less alcohol and tobacco, and increasingly family-oriented. Healthy behavior patterns typically observed at entry training usually continue throughout the career of an officer. Even though the presence of occupation related stress seems to be well documented, it is highly controversial. Many within the law enforcement industry claim the propagation of incorrect suicide, divorce, and substance abuse statistics comes from people or organizations with political or social agendas, and that the presence of these beliefs within the industry makes it hard for health workers to help police officers in need of treatment to deal with the fear of negative consequences from police work which is necessary to enable police officers to develop a healthy expectancy of success in treatment.^[17]

Sources[link]

Even though the presence of occupational stresses appear to be well documented, though not without controversy, the causes of workplace stress are comparatively unclear or even a matter of conjecture.

Although individual policemen and institutional public relations typically cite the risks of being killed in the line of duty as the predominant source of stress for individual policemen, there is significant controversy regarding the causes of personal workplace stress due to the fact that the actual risk of being killed is so small relative to other occupations.

It is charged that the myth of the high risks of occupational mortality connected with police work is often propagated by the law enforcement community as part of its institutional advancement and a central element in its public relations. Actual homicides of police are comparatively rare, but the reports of such incidents are typically reported in the press along with quotes by police officials or police officer family members stressing the notion that police officers 'put their lives on the line for the public' or 'risk their lives everyday', making it look like individual policemen routinely place themselves in mortal danger for low pay and little recognition, and that the view of police work as 'combat' is the source of police occupational stress indications.

Another explanation often advanced is the idea that police officers will undergo some traumatic experience in their police work that they never recover from, leading to suicide, divorce, etc. However, since the effects of such traumatic stresses is readily recognized, there are usually proactive programs in place to help individual police officers deal with the psychological effects of a traumatic event. Unfortunately, there is some evidence that such programs are actually ineffective, especially group therapies, may re-traumatize the participant, weaken coping mechanisms, and contribute to the development of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).^[18][19][20]

Observations where police officers and other emergency workers, such as firemen, experience the same traumatic event, it is more likely that the police officer will have difficulty dealing with the long term emotional effects of the traumatic event. On this observation, some of the academic literature suggests that along these lines the causes of occupational stress is more complex for police officers. Stress in police work is often present in other occupations, but not in an ongoing capacity. One line of thinking is that the individual stresses of police work produce a condition of chronic stress. Police officers encounter stressors in call after call which sap their emotional strength. Debilitation from this daily stress accumulates making officers more vulnerable to traumatic incidents and normal pressures of life. The weakening process is often too slow to see; neither a person nor his friends are aware of the damage being done. The effects of chronic stresses is two-fold:

• First, prolonged stress causes people to regress. Their psychological growth reverses, and they become more immature. They rapidly become more childish and primitive, much like a person being sick for several days becoming more irritable and childish in its demands on other people.
• Second, chronic stress numbs people's sensitivity. They can't stand to continually see human misery. They must stop feeling or they won't survive. The mind has this defense mechanism so people can continue working in horrible situations. If they kept their normal sensitivity, they would fall apart. As they become insensitive to their own suffering, they become insensitive to the suffering of others. When treated with indignity, they lose not only a sense of their own dignity but also the dignity of others. The pain of others stops bothering them, and they are no longer bothered when they hurt others.

The daily work of a police officer involves certain paradoxes and conflicts which may be difficult to deal with, the predominant examples are^[10]

• Any interaction with a member of the public, whether socially or officially, such as in a traffic stop, involves a non-trivial risk of verbal abuse or physical harm. Treating a person with common respect or normal social graces requires the officer to be off guard and unprepared for an attack. Being on guard for an attack and treating every interpersonal situation with safety procedures and affirmative commands makes the police officer appear cynical, brutal, and detached, and limits his actual effectiveness with the public. Considering someone a friend or an enemy produces opposite mental states, an unnatural no-win situation engendering chronic stress.
• A police department is both a professional and military organization, and these two aspects oppose each other. As a professional, he is considered to be an expert in his field and is expected to use his expertise for the good of his public. He has much discretion in how he serves the people who call upon him. However, the dangers and complexities of the work require a military structure of the organization and a military leaning in the training. Although some are actually educated, all police officers are well trained. Policies, regulations, and procedures cover every facet of police work. Everything is expected to be done by the book with substantial repercussions, including civil and criminal liability, for varying from the expectations of operating procedures. Often the facts of a situation require a course of action that does not follow procedures. If he follows procedures exactly, he knows he won't fully help the public, and the public will think he is shirking his responsibility. If the officer follows his own judgment, he is taking a risk. The community and department expect officers to use judgment, but when they do, there is a danger they will be disciplined; another unnatural no-win situation engendering chronic stress.
• Police officers tend to become socially isolated. The reasons given for this isolation are varied and mostly anecdotal. One theory is that police work is not balanced. Most occupations involve a combination of good and bad results. In police work, almost everything is bad, and everybody you deal with is perceived either inherently bad or at least foolish. Another is that police officers develop a 'street wisdom' and by fiat possess a degree of authority that tends to make them perceive themselves as being morally superior to the rest of society. Whatever the reason, the public that the police deal with clearly perceive it and tend to reinforce the divide. Classically when a group of people are isolated, they become disoriented and confused. Their behavior changes drastically. Ironically an isolated class are usually the ones who are losing real world wisdom and tend to judge the world incorrectly from a very limited perspective, leading to interpersonal mistakes and more chronic stress.^{[citation needed]}

A more colloquial view looks at specific sources of stress in police work.^[21] The sources of stress most often actually cited are:

• The fear of killing someone in the line of duty.
• Having your partner or somebody else that you feel at least partly responsible for killed in the line of duty.
• Lack of support by the department or superiors.
• The scheduling of work and irregular work demands resulting in a disruption of family time or family events or rituals.
• The daily grind of dealing with the stupidity of the public, or the "asshole factor".

Other more academic studies have produced similar lists, but may include items that the more colloquial surveys do not reveal, such as 'exposure to neglected, battered, or dead children'^[22]

Again, the actual fear of occupational death or physical harm is not high on the list of stress sources.

There have been numerous academic studies on the specific sources of police stress, and most conclude organizational culture and workload as the key issues in officer stress.^[23] Traumatic events are usually concluded to not be of sufficient scope or prevalence to account for prevalence of suicide, divorce, and substance abuse abnormalities.

Personality theories[link]

Some of the more esoteric, least documented or cited, and more longstanding theories for police stress symptoms involves the interaction of the specifics of police work with the personalities of individual police officers. There has been a raging debate on the fringes of psychiatry as to whether there is something about police work that causes psychiatric symptomology and personality disorders or whether there are certain personalities susceptible to disorders that are attracted to police work. Theory holds that there are four general possibilities:

• There is something about police work, the social structure, the work atmosphere, etc., which causes stresses or presents traumas that cause personality or psychiatric disorders resulting in symptoms such as suicide, divorce, violence, substance abuse, etc. (the foundations of this possibility are outlined above)
• There is one or more personality types or people with certain tendencies or proclivities who are susceptible of developing personality or psychiatric disorders, regardless of their occupation, who because of their personality or preferences are attracted to police work, and then display symptoms of stress or disorders.
• There is a combination of the two.
• Or there is a combination and synergistic interaction of the two.

Some studies have tried to use personality traits to determine police applicant desirability,^[24]. These have generally looked at psychology's Big Five personality traits of openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism. These studies have suggested that age, cynicism and institutional culture affect performance.

There are other personality traits that are specifically not desired for police work that are equally well documented. However, there has been relatively little academic work cited regarding the personality traits attracted to police work. The nature of personality traits of people attracted to police work tends to be a matter of conjecture and anecdotal observations. The personalities of people who are actually in police work tends to be different from that which is purported to be desired by police departments. Police officers tend to be isolated and suspicious, view expression of emotions as a weakness, and find it hard to trust and confide in others.^[25] For example, police officers are often viewed by the public to be domineering, narcissistic, authoritarian, physically oppressive, and basically the opposite of the personality traits most often cited as being desirable in a police officer. There are studies that suggest that people who take risks are attracted to police work.^[26] There is a corresponding theory that police officers actually tend to be people seeking security and stability and are attracted to the job for the steady government paycheck and government pension and adverse to the risks of business, sales, or other occupations. There is ample evidence that there is something in police work that alters personality.

The theory that there is an interaction between the personality attracted to the work and the work itself is mostly conjecture. For example, people attracted to police work are thought to crave the respect and authority that they expect with a badge, gun, uniform, and commission, but most of the people that police officers come in contact with do not respect them, and their authority is strongly regulated and limited by law, policies, and procedures, setting up a conflict resulting in chronic stress.

Abuse of power[link]

Police officers have considerable powers and are often supported by authorities who oversee them if accused of wrongdoing.^[27]

Systematic cases[link]

In dictatorial, corrupt, or weak states, police officers may carry out many criminal acts for the ruling regime with impunity. Examples are the Gestapo secret police in Nazi Germany, and the role of the police in the military dictatorship in Argentina in the 1970s.^[28] Institutional racism has been found in modern police forces.^[29]

Individual cases[link]

Individual officers, or sometimes whole units, can be corrupt or carry out various other forms of misconduct; this occasionally happens in many forces, but is particularly problematic where police pay is very low unless supplemented by bribes.^[30] Police sometimes act with unwarranted brutality when they overreact to confrontational situations,^[31] to extract a confession from a person they may or may not genuinely suspect of being guilty,^[32] or in other circumstances. Instances of racism occur, even when the police force as a whole is not found to be racist.^[33]

See also[link]

• The Thin Blue Line (emblem)
• Cops (TV series)
• Fictional police officers
• Field Training Officer
• List of slang terms for police officers
• Military police
• Peace officer
• Police brutality
• Police rank
• Police procedural
• President Grover Cleveland—former Sheriff of Erie County, New York
• President Theodore Roosevelt—Deputy Sheriff in the Dakota Territory, and New York City Police Commissioner

References[link]

External links[link]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Police officers

• Thin Blue Line Emblem
• http://www.discoverpolicing.org
• Metropolitan Police history
• http://www.newscotlandyard.police.uk/foi/pdfs/other_information/corporate/operational_uniform_and_equipment.pdf
• http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/publications/freedom-of-information/policy.asp?id=144
• http://www.gmp.police.uk/mainsite/pages/pcsouniform.htm,ts=2
• http://www.policelink.com