Published: February 08, 2006 03:27 pm      

County police force off March ballot

BOC opts for diplomacy with Sheriff's Office

Over two years ago the Butts County Board of Commissioners, in response to what was perceived as unnecessary expenditures on behalf of the Sheriff’s Office, explored the formation of a county police force. Both the commissioners and Sheriff’s Office employees traded words, Sheriff Gene Pope offering that a county police force would put too great of a burden on taxpayers; the commissioners explaining that they were looking into all possible ways to save money, and that a county police force would not be started without proper study and research.

The commissioners eventually voted to establish a committee to begin that study and research, but for whatever reason, the committee never got off the ground. Following an accident involving off-duty Butts County Sheriff’s Deputies in early November, the county police question again has been brought to the table, with the commissioners unanimously deciding to place a county police referendum on the “school SPLOST” ballot, to be held on March 21.

At the monthly meeting of the Board of Commissioners held this past Monday evening, County Administrator Dr. Van Whaler suggested not placing the county police referendum on the March 21 ballot, instead recommending a series of summit meetings between the commissioners and the Sheriff’s Office to take place throughout the year. Whaler suggested three meetings, one each in the months of March, July and October in order to resolve any issues the two entities may have. In the event that these meetings fail to yield a resolution, the county police referendum will be placed on the November ballot.

The meetings will likely provide both the commissioners and Sheriff ample time to work out their grievances, which appears to be necessary: in a flashback to years ago, the same arguments – pro and contra – have arisen. To be sure, the formation of county police is a large step, drastically altering the Sheriff’s duties, and putting a greater leadership role on the commissioners.

Fifteen years ago, neighboring Henry County instituted a county police force – a decision that has proved beneficial to all involved.

“Traditionally, when a county decides to move towards creating a county police force, you divide the duties: the Sheriff’s focus becomes the detention center and the courthouse, serving warrants and civil papers,” said Henry County Public Safety Director Mike Turner. “From there, the traditional service is transitioned to the county police force. Of course, the Sheriff’s deputies will still have the power to issue citations, but that will be left primarily to the county police force. The Sheriff is a constitutional officer; his authority will not be stripped when services are transferred.”

While there are many counties that have instituted county police forces, not all of them have seen smooth transitions.

“It really depends on the relationships,” said Turner. “And those relationships depend on the personalities running the county police force and the Sheriff’s Office. The commissioners will have a greater leadership role, and it’s all about working together. It worked out well here in Henry County, but there are other times when it doesn’t work, that’s for sure,” laughed Turner.

While conditions in Henry proved to be ideal, that’s only because the transition went so smoothly, with each entity bearing its burden, and growing into its new role with relative ease. Admittedly, the commissioner’s leadership role is far from window dressing; it will add multiple duties to the existing workload, and possibly create friction if one of the entities involved is reluctant to cooperate.

“The county police become a county department under the jurisdiction of the county commissioners or the county manager,” said ACCG Assistant Director of Administration Mike Stewart. “They become responsible for a lot: supervising the county chief’s duties, supervising officers and so on and so forth. The Sheriff is still going to be able to issue citations, and if he doesn’t want to relinquish patrol, he doesn’t have to; he’s a constitutional officer – the commissioners can’t force him to do anything he doesn’t want to do. If the Sheriff wants to continue running patrols, he can do that.

“Over the years, we’ve seen a number of counties that have had differences with their Sheriff,” said Stewart, “but I’ll be the first to tell you: It’s not always the Sheriff’s fault. The reason for implementing a county police force is different every time. You may have an instance where the Sheriff says that he’s not going to patrol any longer; that he’s only going to provide services to the courthouse and the jail, and the commissioners have to act accordingly: without anyone doing patrols, they’ve got to form a county police force.

“Again, there’s likely to be some lively discussion between the commissioners and the Sheriff on this,” Stewart continued. “The Sheriff could just refuse to give up his deputies. Then those deputies won’t be transitioned over to the county force; in turn, the county has to go out and find people to hire.”

The first summit meeting between the commissioners and the Sheriff has been scheduled for Monday, March 13.