San Juan County Sheriff Eric Peter releases a statement about two current bills being reviewed by the Washington State legislature.
||| FROM ERIC PETER, SAN JUAN COUNTY SHERIFF |||
San Juan County Sheriff Eric Peter released the following statement about two current bills being reviewed by the Washington State legislature:
“The county Sheriff is the only directly elected law-enforcement officer directly chosen by the people of Washington. Direct election makes the Sheriff accountable and responsive to the people of their counties. That direct accountability isn’t a relic of history. It’s a constitutional design that gives local communities authority over their own public-safety leadership.
Right now, that design is at risk. A bill before the Legislature, SB5974, would empower the state’s Criminal Justice Training Commission- an unelected regulatory body- to decertify a Sheriff under broad and in some cases undefined criteria. This state decertification would immediately remove the Sheriff from office, overturning the result of a county election.
Supporters present this as simple modernization or standardization. In reality, it’s a transfer of power away from voters and into the hands of an appointed commission. Accountability for public-safety leaders is essential, but removing an elected official from office is not an administrative manner. In a constitutional democracy, that authority belongs to voters, not bureaucratic bodies.
The concern is not theoretical. The proposed grounds for decertification include vague or undefined concepts, including, what someone or some legislative body thinks, feels, or believes instead of a factual grounds for decertification. When subjective standards become triggers for removing an elected official, political misuse becomes a foreseeable risk.
There is a better approach, one that strengthens accountability while preserving voters’ rightful authority. Under the alternative legislation supported by the Washington State Sheriff’s Association, HB2387, s state decertification of an elected Sheriff would initiate recall proceedings, placing the question in the hands of the only constitutionally sound authority for such action: the electorate.
The “Sheriff’s Accountability to the Voters Act” ensures Sheriffs face a unique degree of direct accountability without allowing an unelected board to simply erase a county election.
Electing the Sheriff is how most Washington communities ensure their law-enforcement leader remains responsive to local priorities rather than external political pressures. Replacing that democratic bond with removal by an unelected commission would fundamentally alter the role of a constitutional office.
As legislators debate these bills, constituent voices matter. If you believe that accountability for Sheriff’s should remain rotted in voter choice, we encourage you to contact your state legislators and supports the proposal that links CJTC decertification to established recall procedures and reject any bill that permits an unelected commission to override a county election.
Do you want legislators making decisions that essentially tell you that your vote doesn’t count? Do you want legislators deciding what’s best for your community instead of the voters? I encourage all Washington voters to express your opinions about both of these bills using the legislature’s online portals:
To register your opinion on SB5974, which allows the state to remove Sheriff’s by decertifying them, go to https://app.leg.wa.gov/pbc/
Washington voters should never involuntarily lose the right to hire/elect or fire/recall their Sheriff. This session, lawmakers should strengthen that principle, not dismantle it.
**If you are reading theOrcasonian for free, thank your fellow islanders. If you would like to support theOrcasonian CLICK HERE to set your modestly-priced, voluntary subscription. Otherwise, no worries; we’re happy to share with you.**
Sheriff Eric Peters advocates against having a commission ( not defined in his post) have the ability to decertify (remove) an elected Sheriff.
His position is voters elect sheriffs, and only voters should have the authority to vote a sheriff out of office.
The problem with that approach is that r occasionally , but rarely, here are sheriffs in this state and others who openly state they will not enforce constitutional or state laws. That’s legally wrong, and it might take years to replace an elected sheriff, assuming of course there is another person running on the next election.
And how many people fully vet a sheriff? Sheriff candidates can say almost anything in the voters pamphlet. Crowds of voters usually don’t show up for sheriff pre-election forums, if there are any at all. And recalls are extremely rare.
This isn’t a current issue in SJC, but it’s an issue with some sheriffs in this and some other states.
The discussion for the state legislature on these bills is to ensure the proposed commission consists of a reasonable balance of fair minded, responsible individuals.
Should all elected representatives be able to be decertified/removed by committee rather than by election process? Who gets to pick the members of the “commission”?
I am less concerned about “big government overreach” and more concerned about a growing anti-government movement. Another sheriff from Washington state who opposes SB 5974 recently became an example of why this bill should pass.
Pierce County Sheriff Keith Swank gained national attention for his opposition to not only SB 5974, but also to SB 5855, which would prevent local, state, and federal law enforcement officers from wearing face masks. This legislation is a response to a lack of accountability from the DHS (ICE and CBP) immigration enforcers who are currently not very popular with the majority of Americans.
What did Mr. Swank have to say about this? Months ago he told lawmakers that they didn’t have the authority to pass these laws. In his own words:
“I don’t recognize your authority to impose these controls over me. And when you try to remove me from office, thousands of Pierce County residents will surround the county city building in downtown Tacoma and will not allow that to happen.”
Swank also said if SB 5855 was passed, he would instruct his deputies to wear masks anyway to “see what the (lawmakers) would do.”
“I hope it doesn’t come to that, but I and they are prepared,” he said. “Are you prepared?”
This is not democracy in action, this is sedition. As we’re seeing in “the other Washington” right now, some people think that winning an election gives them a free pass to break the law. But we can’t have elected officials challenging the authority of county governments or violating state or federal laws just because they won an election.
Swank has only been on the job for one year, and it’s unclear whether Pierce County voters would give him a second term. But between now and the next election, he could do a lot of damage. Remember the crazy mob that surrounded the Governor’s mansion during the pandemic? There are people out there who are consuming anti-government propaganda 24/7 and don’t seem to understand how democracy actually works. There must be a process to remove people like Swank from office. If an elected official wants to enjoy the privileges and protections of the democratic process, they must also respect and uphold that process.
The Washington state Senate just passed SB 5855 by a 30-19 margin yesterday, and the vote now heads to the state House. The legislature should pass SB 5974 too. It’s an important safeguard against rogue sheriffs, particularly of the right-wing liberatarian variety, who believe what winning one election gives them the right to undermine the authority of the much larger democratic constituencies who are represented in Olympia.