WA law requires strict new standards and removals for sheriffs

This story was written by Jake Goldstein Street

with the Washington State Standard.

Washington Governor Bob Ferguson on Wednesday

signed into law new standards for sheriffs

that make it easier to remove them from office.

But Ferguson didn't love all of Senate Bill 5974,

suggesting it could be tweaked in 2027.

Sheriffs, who are mostly elected in Washington,

ardently opposed the law as undemocratic.

The law's supporters who see it

as holding police leaders to the same standards

as their rank-and-file officers expect litigation.

The legislation requires county sheriffs

and police chiefs to meet heightened eligibility standards.

The criteria include having five years

of full-time law enforcement experience,

not having any felony or gross misdemeanor convictions,

being at least 25 years old, and not having done anything

that would get state certification as a peace officer revoked.

Until now, sheriffs haven't had to meet

the same eligibility requirements as police chiefs.

Sheriffs are elected, except in King County,

while police chiefs are appointed.

Within nine months of taking office,

the bill says sheriffs need to get their certification

if they don't already have it.

Previously, they had a year.

If they don't obtain or lose certification

from the State Criminal Justice Training Commission

or otherwise don't meet the new requirements,

sheriffs would have to vacate office.

This aspect of the bill has drawn the most eyeer.

The commission also decides on rescinding officer certification.

Critics say the law gives the commission too much power.

Five member hearing panels from the Criminal Justice Training

Commission make final decisions on desertification.

The panels include three civilians and two police officials.

Several sitting sheriffs have opened complaints

before the commission, including Pierce County Sheriff Keith

Swank, who drew criticism earlier this year

after delivering testimony some lawmakers

took as threatening.

Local officials will be tasked with appointing a replacement

if a sheriff is removed.

Until now, the only recourse for removing a sheriff

from office has been the rarely used recall process,

which leaves the decision up to voters.

Ferguson said Wednesday that he had reservations

about this vacancy process.

He had the option to veto parts of the bill,

but stopped short of taking that step.

Sheriffs had been pressing the governor

to veto sections of the bill for weeks.

Some of them met with Ferguson in recent weeks

to express their frustrations, he said.

It's a serious step when someone's being removed from office

speaking as an elected official.

Ferguson told reporters,

I just want to make sure we're being as thoughtful

as possible on that.

And so I just press that to the bill sponsors.

I don't make too big a deal out of it.

I'll be looking for ways if we can just improve that process

a little bit as we go into next session, he added,

noting it's too early to say what those revisions could be.

In the days before signing, Ferguson called Bill Sponsor

Senator John Lovek, demil Creek, to share his concerns.

They met again this week, Lovek said.

We were able to satisfy his concerns, Lovek said,

noting lawmakers may return to the issue

when they reconvene next January,

but it'll likely still be in the limelight in the meantime.

Representative Roger Goodman, D. Kirkland,

is expecting a lawsuit over the law,

but thinks it'll be upheld.

We worked really hard to make sure

this is constitutional, said Goodman,

who led the charge for the law in the House.

Ferguson also said he's confident

the law can withstand legal scrutiny.

The Washington Association of Sheriffs

and Police Chiefs declined to comment Wednesday,

but had written to the governor last month, urging his veto.

Walla Walla County Sheriff, Mark Criter,

has been one of the law's most vocal critics,

but wasn't reachable for comment on Wednesday.

We've made our point that this is an unconstitutional

piece of legislation that takes away the voters' right

to choose who their elected officials are,

Criter said last month.

In my opinion, the whole thing is looking for a problem

that doesn't exist.

Sheriffs have also expressed concerns

about another provision in the law,

requiring sheriff candidates to get a background check

from the Washington State Patrol.

Counties will foot the bill for those costs.

The sheriff say this will burden counties

that are already strapped for cash.

Most of the laws provisions take effect at the end of April.

Its limitations on the use of police volunteers

don't kick in until January.

On this issue, the law says police agencies

can't use untrained volunteers

to enforce criminal statutes or civil immigration laws,

engage in pursuits, use force, carry weapons,

or use surveillance technology, among other things.

They could still assist with administrative support

and other more routine duties.

They also must be distinguishable from commissioned officers.

This report was first published

by the Washington State Standard.