Judge to decide if Benton sheriff retaliated against employees and whistleblowers

An administrative law judge will decide if Benton County Sheriff Jerry Hatcher retaliated against two whistleblowers and three witnesses — all employees.

The hearing was requested by a union lawyer after Benton County commissioners said again this week that they have no authority to fire or discipline the elected sheriff.

A letter, approved and signed by Chairman Jim Beaver and Commissioner Jerome Delvin, said the county will apply for a fact-finding hearing with the Office of Administrative Hearings.

That letter was in response to complaints filed in June by the employees, who sought a remedy under the county’s Whistleblower Protection Policy.

In a fact-finding hearing, Hatcher will have the opportunity to refute the allegations. He also will face cross-examination by attorney Alan Harvey of Vancouver, Wash., who represents the employees.

“We are empathetic to the plight of your clients in working for Sheriff Hatcher. Additionally, as a prior letter from the board indicated, we support the (Benton County Deputy Sheriff’s) Guild’s recall efforts,” the commissioners replied to Harvey.

Commissioner Shon Small was absent from Tuesday’s meeting.

The formal request for an administrative law hearing came one day after Hatcher was served with a recall petition filed with Benton County Auditor Brenda Chilton.

Recall petition

The 317-page packet was filed by sheriff’s Sgt. Jason Erickson and alleges 26 violations of state law and the sheriff’s oath of office.

Erickson says in addition to committing illegal acts and performing the duties of his office in an improper manner, Hatcher has used his position to intimidate witnesses and public servants and to tamper with physical evidence.

Hatcher has denied any wrongdoings and previously told the Tri-City Herald that the union is to blame for not being ready for the changes he started introducing three years ago.

He has called the recall effort an attempt of organized labor to take over management of his office, and said Benton County voters will see through it and keep him in office.

Hatcher has been sheriff since May 2017 when he was picked to take over the position following the resignation of Steve Keane. He has been elected twice since then.

As an elected official, Hatcher can only be removed from office in a county election. He also can step down voluntarily before his term is up at the end of 2022.

The whistleblower complaints were filed after Hatcher asked Franklin County Sheriff Jim Raymond to conduct an administrative review of the Benton County office for any alleged policy violations.

That review was in response to the discovery of more than 14,000 rounds of county-owned ammunition and two county-owned guns at Hatcher’s former Kennewick home.

Hatcher had been ordered to turn over all weapons last fall as the result of a temporary civil protection order entered against him in his divorce case.

Whistleblower complaints

The employees, in their whistleblower complaints, allege their boss retaliated against them by issuing potential violations against them during the investigation and trying to influence what answers they gave investigatgors.

They also allege that Hatcher called for the administrative review by Franklin County under the pretext of finding out who had been talking to his wife, Monica Hatcher, throughout the divorce case.

A number of the allegations in the whistleblower complaints mirror the allegations filed by Erickson in the recall petition.

The county commissioners, in their letter to attorney Harvey, said they could hold a quasi-judicial hearing.

But, even if they employees’ complaints were found substantiated, the commissioners couldn’t take any further action against the sheriff.

“A seasoned administrative law judge would be better equipped to preside over what is sure to be a very adversarial process involving the sheriff,” the letter said.

“This decision is in no way an attempt to slow down or obstruct the process, but rather is aimed at allowing for the best fact-finding hearing possible and giving your clients a possibility of receiving some form of relief from a neutral third party.”

This story was originally published July 23, 2020 at 1:49 PM.