By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The police chief and three officers in Geary, Oklahoma resigned, leaving the town’s entire police department empty. Additionally, two city council members stepped down, leaving just one member in the council due to an earlier vacancy. The city has assured citizens that normal services will be maintained, with assistance from sheriffs’ offices in nearby counties and an interim police chief, reportedly veteran law enforcement officer JJ Stitt. The reasons for the resignations were not clearly stated, with former police chief Alicia Ford describing the decision as a difficult but correct one. Council member Glen “Rocky” Coleman Jr. noted a mismatch in values and lack of administrative communication as his reasons for resigning.
Read the original article here
The news about the Geary, Oklahoma police chief and the entire police department resigning simultaneously, with little explanation, strikes at the heart of something deeply unsettling. My immediate reaction is a blend of disbelief and a familiar sense of foreboding that echoes my past experiences in small-town law enforcement dynamics. Geary is not just a blip on the map; it’s a community of nearly 1,000 people, a relatively tight-knit demographic where news travels fast, and secrets are hard to keep. And yet, here we are, staring at an opaque situation that raises more questions than answers.
The chief’s statement hinted at difficulty but lacked substance. That in itself speaks volumes. It’s easy to speculate about the dynamics at play here, considering it’s a small police force comprising just four officers. In such a limited setting, any conflict feels magnified. The prospect of leaving a whole town without a police presence is alarming, but it also suggests more than just personal reasons behind their exodus. The way things are outlined raises a red flag about the potential for deeper issues at play—corruption, misconduct, or systemic failure—all possible circumstances that could compel an entire department to throw in the towel en masse.
Small towns tend to create environments where law enforcement can easily spin out of control. Everyone knows everyone, and that familiarity can breed contempt, favoritism, or even blatant abuse. The resignation of the entire department feels like a response to something much darker that can’t be easily addressed or articulated. I can’t help but recall the countless tales I’ve heard and witnessed firsthand about small-town police—stories filled with toxic cultures, embezzlement, and acts of misconduct that would shock the average citizen. The silence of the remaining city officials in Geary suggests a wall of fear and complicity that permeates the community.
In a town so small, the very existence of a police department raises questions about resource allocation and necessity. What can four officers realistically do for a population of 1,000? That scant number suggests underfunding and overextension. Perhaps the officers realized that they were caught in a system that’s broken beyond repair, ultimately choosing to resign rather than compromise their principles or participate in unethical practices. The fact that two council members chose to leave as well indicates a broader discontent that could very well tie back to the mayor’s decisions or actions. This looks like a collapse of governance from the ground up, where leaders recognize their inability to function effectively and opt for the exit instead.
Speculation abounds regarding what might have triggered this upheaval. It’s hard to ignore the specter of internal misconduct that seems to plague these small policing institutions. The irony here is palpable; a police unit meant to uphold the law instead becomes synonymous with lawlessness. The exodus of the entire department rings like the sirens of trouble calling out for accountability. These are not just personal stories; they’re indicative of a system that too often protects the corrupt while punishing the innocent.
The encouragement for residents to engage with city council meetings feels almost patronizing, especially in the context of a government that has essentially collapsed. What good does attending these meetings do when those who should be leading and guiding have either fled or chosen silence instead? True reform requires transparency and courage from leaders, not mere lip service directed at a populace that deserves far better.
Seeing this all unfold in a town with the added historical significance of having a Native American mayor should prompt us to explore the nuances of governance in Oklahoma and beyond. The struggle for effective leadership in such an environment cannot be overstated, and it often comes down to who is willing to stand up against the pervasive issues at play. The palpable absence of accountability in places like Geary is part of a larger narrative that merits serious scrutiny and discussion.
In the end, the resignation of an entire police department—a concept that feels inconceivable in many places—illuminates an underlying pathology of small-town governance that is crying out for attention. While on the surface, it could simply be seen as chaos, to me, it represents a desperate plea for change in a fundamentally flawed system. Until these issues are confronted and addressed, the cycle will perpetuate itself, and communities will continue to wrestle with the shadow of their own policing entities. The story of Geary is one that demands we pay attention—not just to what has happened, but to what it says about us as a society moving forward.