Sheriff Swank marshals forces to disrupt Pierce County charter-review process
An elected Pierce County commission eyeing changes to the way the county’s government functions has less than a month to send proposed amendments to the ballot, and efforts to advance those seismic shifts or stop them in their tracks are heating up.
Sheriff Keith Swank took to social media recently to ask his followers to show up in large numbers to meetings in Gig Harbor and Tacoma. Writing that the 21-member Charter Review Commission was controlled by “leftist radicals” bringing the county closer to tyranny with each meeting, Swank posted June 1 that the only way to stop the commission was to show up and speak at public comment.
“The more we speak, the less they pass crazy amendments to put on the ballot this November,” Swank said.
The commission, which is made up of three representatives from each of the County Council’s seven districts, has nearly doubled the number of meetings scheduled for this month and restricted individual public comments to two minutes instead of three. It has until June 29 to vote on sending amendments to the ballot. Getting there requires a majority vote of the commission.
Some of the more controversial proposals include reverting to an appointed, rather than popularly elected sheriff; creating a new executive department of Sheriff Ombuds to provide independent oversight of the Sheriff’s Office; and an amendment that would increase the number of County Council districts from seven to nine.
Commissioner Jake Hunter, who represents District 4, which comprises parts of Tacoma and the cities of Fircrest and University Place, sponsored the appointed sheriff proposal. In a phone call, Hunter told The News Tribune that the commission still has a lot of work to complete, and that Swank was calling on his base to interrupt the work of the commission.
“I think that the statements that he is making on social media are threatening,” Hunter said. “They’re calling us a threat to democracy, basically. It’s whipping up his supporters in a way that is not necessarily safe for the rest of the commissioners and myself.”
Swank did not respond to multiple requests for comment for this story.
In a June 3 email to some of the commission’s leadership, including Commission Chair Kelsey Barrans and Vice Chair Martha Lantz, Hunter asked that two of Swank’s June 1 and June 2 posts to X and Facebook be entered into the commission’s public record.
Hunter wrote in the email that he supported robust public participation and welcomes testimony for and against any charter amendment. But he said Swank’s posts were encouraging residents to use public comment as a means of preventing the commission from completing its work.
“The Charter Review Commission was created by the voters to review and propose amendments to the Charter,” Hunter wrote. “Public comment is intended to inform that process, not obstruct it. I believe elected officials should encourage civic participation and debate on the merits, rather than efforts to delay or hinder the Commission’s ability to carry out its voter-mandated responsibilities.”
Asked about Swank’s posts, Lantz said in a phone call Wednesday that she felt it was Barrans’ and her duty to do their utmost to get through the proposals in front of the commission by the end of June. Consistent with that, she said, was the public’s right to participate. Lantz said she didn’t want to presume the intent of those who come to speak at meetings.
“If the intent is to obstruct, you know, that’s not great, but the ability to comment is absolutely there, and we honor that,” Lantz said. “We give everybody two minutes. We ask that they not be disruptive and not behave in a way that interferes with the ability of others to give their comments, and we ask that they limit it to a proposal that is actually before the body.”
The commission’s June 3 meeting began at 6 p.m. Public comment occurred at the beginning of the meeting, and it ran for about an hour and a half. Four commissioners voted to extend individual public comment to three minutes, but the motion failed. The meeting adjourned at about 10:15 p.m.
Swank spoke during public comment in opposition to a charter amendment that proposes adding new ways elected offices may be declared vacant, including when an official is convicted of a felony or a gross misdemeanor for official misconduct, misuse of public resources or falsification or concealment of public records. It also suggests suspending elected officials when they are charged with these types of offenses, and it outlines how the vacancy would be filled
Swank said he believed Commissioner Troy Serad, who sponsored the amendment, meant well, but that he saw the possibility for it to be abused. Serad represents District 5, which includes Browns Point and Dash Point, the Port of Tacoma, Eastside Tacoma, Fife, Midland, Parkland and parts of Spanaway.
“A prosecutor who doesn’t like the executive or the sheriff could file charges against these two and say that since the executive didn’t obey the executive orders imposed by the president, he or she intentionally refrained from performing a duty imposed upon him or her by law,” Swank said.
The first person who spoke during the comment period was interrupted within a minute by a commissioner who asked for a point of order for the individual to state what item on the agenda they were speaking to. When he resumed, he referred to the proposal to create oversight of the Sheriff’s Office as “subterfuge” on Swank.
“Are you Americans who believe in the constitutional republic form of government, or are you Marxist interlopers who are seeking to further enslave us?” the commenter said.
It’s no surprise that public comments at a government meeting sometimes become melodramatic. Absurd complaints and statements made at public forums have been famously lampooned by TV shows such as Parks and Recreation and the Simpsons. But Hunter said some comments have veered into hate speech and anti-gay rhetoric.
Asked about recent comments, Lantz cautioned that she did not want to speak on behalf of the commission. She said she’s spent her entire career working in government law, and listening to the public comes with the territory.
“Hearing things that are unpleasant, uncomfortable, vitriolic, you know, mean, rancorous, not pleasant, I don’t like it,” Lantz said. “But people have the right to express themselves in a way that’s not disruptive, that is reasonably respectful, and that doesn’t impede the business of the body.”
After the June 3 meeting, Swank wrote on X the next morning that there was a good showing, and that there were probably 50 people who spoke in person and 40 online. He encouraged people to come to the next meeting June 8.
“Now, if only EVERYONE spoke for two minutes,” Swank wrote. “That would have taken up 200+ minutes (over three hours), and that would help us in our fight against government over-reach.”
