When mayors call, should chiefs answer? Citizen attitudes on police-civilian relations and operational independence

This research examines how citizens and residents think authority should be allocated between police chiefs and elected officials in two domains of police governance: operational decision-making and the setting of crime-control objectives. The study challenges the adequacy of a single doctrine of “operational independence” by showing that public preferences for police autonomy versus political control are structured and context-dependent. Analyses draw on two attitudinal surveys: a nationally representative sample of 1200 Canadians and a second representative oversample of 1200 residents from one province. To assess support for police autonomy and oversight, we adapted two items from the civil-military relations literature to the context of police-civilian relations. The results show that perceptions of the police shape governance preferences in predictable ways. More favorable evaluations of police are associated with stronger support for police chief-led objective setting, while perceptions of police bias are associated with greater support for mayors overseeing police operations. These findings suggest that effective police governance requires balancing operational independence with political oversight in ways that reflect community preferences for civil-police relations. This research contributes new empirical evidence on citizen attitudes toward authority allocation in policing and highlights the importance of incorporating public opinion into debates on police governance.