Yes, Pierce County elected a new sheriff. Next we need to vote on the whole system
For those who pay attention to such things, there was a curious juxtaposition between Pierce County and its northern neighbor on Election Night. Each embarked on new eras of law enforcement that look very different from each other.
Pierce County voters elected their first new sheriff in 20 years, giving the department’s longtime public information officer, Detective Ed Troyer, a landslide victory. And King County voters? They decided they’re done electing sheriffs, approving a ballot measure that will make it an appointed position.
Troyer has his work cut out for him. He must fight for sustainable budgets while facing “defund the police” headwinds. He must strike a balance between public safety and justice for all, between force and de-escalation. He must deal with fallout from the homicide investigation of Manny Ellis, a Black man who died in Tacoma police custody last March — a clumsy investigation for which Troyer was the public face.
To sum up, this 35-year department veteran with a reputation for decency but a slim management record must lead cultural transformation in an organization of nearly 600 deputies. We wish him godspeed and hope he develops into a first-rate sheriff.
But Pierce County leaders shouldn’t ignore what just happened up north. King County voters were asked if they want to professionalize the top job in the uniformed ranks, making the sheriff answerable to the county executive and county council rather than to voters every four years. On Tuesday, 56 percent of those voting said yes.
South Sounders should have the same opportunity to switch to an appointed sheriff.
Changing the Pierce County charter is a right reserved for voters, but first an amendment has to be drafted and sent to the ballot. This task is best handled by an elected charter review commission that meets every 10 years. Alas, it’s not scheduled to convene again until 2026, and that’s too long to wait.
Plan B is for the County Council to approve a charter amendment and submit it to voters for ratification. Council members ought to put that on their 2021 to-do list.
The surest way to find a highly trained, experienced, professional sheriff is through a selection process, not an election process. For large counties like ours, a national search is typically conducted, which opens a much deeper pool than what election-eligible Pierce County residents swim in.
This year’s sheriff election underscored the shallow-pool problem. All four candidates were dedicated public servants, but each had such significant baggage or holes in their resumes that this Editorial Board took the rare step of not endorsing anyone.
Another benefit of having an appointed sheriff is that it provides day-to-day oversight and serves as an immediate check against corruption.
Pierce County was fortunate to have Paul Pastor, a sheriff of unquestioned integrity, for the past 20 years. But old-timers will recall the late-1970s’ bribery ring that sent former Sheriff George Janovich to prison. Ten years earlier, King County weathered the indictment of Sheriff Jack Porter for taking payoffs from a criminal syndicate.
The twin scandals prompted both counties to switch to an appointed sheriff system — but only temporarily. Memories fade.
If that seems like ancient history, there’s a timely reason to return to an appointed sheriff, and we believe it transcends all others: It would help Pierce County focus on police reform in a deliberate way, like what Tacoma is doing right now in its police chief appointment process.
Tacoma Chief Don Ramsdell, like Pastor, has been in charge for most of two decades. Now the mayor and City Council are being rigorous about replacing him with a “transformational” leader, consistent with other changes such as installing police body cameras and banning chokeholds.
Every local police department has an appointed chief. So does the Washington State Patrol. For whatever reason, counties consistently play by different rules. All of Washington’s 39 counties have elected sheriffs; King will soon be the exception.
Pierce County has seesawed between the two systems, most recently in 2006; that’s when voters amended the charter to go back to the elected model. Pastor cruised to easy wins three times thereafter.
But a lot has changed in the last 15 years, and many people are looking at law enforcement agencies through a different lens.
Perhaps voters are content to stay with the status quo. Perhaps they’re wary of micromanagement and political manipulation of the sheriff’s office by elected officials who’d do the appointing. Perhaps they agree with the Washington State Sheriffs’ Association, which wrote a letter two weeks before Election Day, saying in part, “Sheriffs are, and should remain, directly accountable to the people.”
Those are all valid perspectives, and Pierce County residents should have a chance to weigh the pros and cons. There’s no reason not to let them vote on this again.