Franklin commissioners flout transparency, risk safety with jail takeover | Editorial

Franklin County commissioners seized control of the county jail and security at the county courthouse from Sheriff Jim Raymond in barely 24 hours.

Their power grab raises serious questions about transparency and public safety.

Commissioners Clint Didier, Stephen Bauman and Rocky Mullen did not discuss the jail and courthouse security takeovers in any meaningful way before approving the resolutions at their April 23 meeting. They made no case for how this will better serve taxpayers and public safety.

In four minutes and change, they passed both resolutions with only tangential comments.

The best they could muster to justify their actions were baseless allegations of fiscal mismanagement by the sheriff based on state audits that in fact placed blame on the county for oversight failures.

Bauman insisted that nothing secretive went on.

“There’s been concern that this was made hastily and in the dark. I would disagree with that notion,” he said of the jail takeover, citing meetings with commissioners and four other counties. He added that he had participated in “thorough conversation over the last number of months.”

When? Where? With whom specifically? None of those meetings or conversations that he claims to have had occurred before the public.

If he met with his fellow commissioners, they might have violated state open meetings laws. Even if they skirted a violation of the letter of the law, they broke its spirit.

The Washington Public Meetings Act does not allow commissioners to coordinate such significant votes in advance.

“It is the intent of this chapter that (public commissions’) actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly,” the law states. “The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know.”

Didier, Bauman and Mullen failed to incorporate and accept public comment during their decision-making process.

They also did not consult the people who will be most affected by the change. Corrections Deputy Jesus Garcia’s poignant question during the public comment period after the vote spoke volumes.

“I noticed Mr. Bauman, you mentioned that this wasn’t done in secret, that you had done months of research and talked to other people, I think my question and what many of us down at the jail are questioning is, why none of this was ever mentioned to us?” Garcia asked.

The dedicated men and women who work in the jail and protect the courthouse are on the front lines.

They deal with complex, dangerous situations. Their insights, concerns and expertise would have been invaluable, but commissioners blindsided them with changes that will fundamentally alter their professional lives and potentially their safety.

No longer under the sheriff’s management, jailers and courthouse security officers might lose their ability to carry firearms and make arrests. The change also jeopardizes state accreditation.

The commissioners’ idea that private security could protect the courthouse security is unsettling. Judges and court staff should have the protection of trained law enforcement officers with full arrest powers, not potentially less-qualified and unarmed security personnel. At least Sheriff Raymond pledged to keep deputies in place until a court order dictates otherwise.

Commissioners have the authority to run the jail and probably courthouse security. They oversee the budgets, after all.

Some other counties, including Benton, have gone down this same road, but few so recklessly.

There is enough legal uncertainty in this mess that taxpayers might wind up paying for costly litigation, diverting public resources from better uses.

It’s not too late for Didier, Bauman and Mullen to reconsider.

We urge them to step back, make a public case for why this is necessary, engage in open and honest dialogue with all stakeholders and develop a plan to roll out changes on a responsible timeline.

The well-being of the community depends on it.