| Court sanctions 911 board BY DALE ELLIS
Managing Editor 22 Jan 2003
The White County Quorum Court approved the formation of a
new 911 Emergency Services System Administrative Board by a vote of 10 in favor, two
against, and one abstaining, during the January meeting Tuesday. David Freppon and Mike
Cleveland voted against the measure, which was unexpectedly placed on the third and final
reading Tuesday night, and Layne Vaughn abstained from the vote after saying he did not
have adequate time to study the proposal. The vote sparked a protest from Sheriff Pat
Garrett, who said after the meeting that he believed he had been left out of most of the
discussion and that the quorum court members had not spent enough time learning about the
communications center to know what was needed.
"I have a problem when 13 justices that have spent less
than 30 minutes total in my 911 center give authority to four board members to
administrate that system when the court doesn't even know what they will be
administrating," Garrett said. "But, now that the decision has been made, the
sheriff and my department will cooperate by all legal means."
J.P. Johney Gibson said that, with the passage of the
ordinance, the county judge will now have the responsibility to present appointments for
the four board members and a full-time coordinator.
The request by Judge Bob Parish, following passage of the
second reading, to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on the third reading, set off
an extended discussion by the court as to whether or not that would be the best course of
action. Vaughn asked if the system would be consolidated into one or left as two separate
systems operated by both the White County Sheriff's Department and the Searcy Police
Department.
"As it appears right now," Gibson said, "the
two systems are to our advantage."
Under the provisions of the ordinance, the police and
sheriff's departments will report to the board.
The quorum court also authorized Mike Rainwater, an attorney
with the firm of Duncan & Rainwater, to draft ordinances outlining both permanent and
at will employment policies for the county. Currently, Rainwater told the court, the
county is operating under an old, permanent employment policy that is out of date and is
not in legal or constitutional compliance. The policy the county operates under was
adopted in 1988, Rainwater pointed out.
"In the world we live in," he said, "fourteen
years is a long time."
He pointed out that, since the adoption of the current
policy, several federal acts, such as the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Americans With
Disabilities Act, and federal drug testing guidelines, have been passed that are not
addressed by the policy. However, several justices seemed to be confused by Rainwater's
assertion that, regardless of the policy chosen, the elected department heads could select
a permanent or at-will policy by which to run their departments. Justice Bud Osborn asked,
in that case, why the county even needed a policy.
He was told that an up-to-date policy would protect the
county in the event of a lawsuit.
"You need to draw something up," Parish told the
justices. "We've bounced this ball for three years."
An initial resolution to have Rainwater draw up an at-will
policy was amended after lengthy discussion to direct him to draw up both an at-will
policy and a permanent policy to give the justices a choice to look over.
Garrett, who said he has had problems with the county policy
in the past, told the justices that an up-to-date policy is badly needed.
"If we get sued tomorrow morning you're going to wish
we had a policy because this one is not defendable in court," the sheriff said.
Garrett requested authorization from the court to expand the
tent program at the detention center, saying that the jail is strained beyond its
capacity. As of the meeting, Garrett told the justices that the detention center was
housing 121 inmates, 30 beyond the maximum number allowed by county ordinance.
"I'm concerned about the number," Justice Carthel
Oakley commented. "I thought we were trying to keep the number down."
"Where do you want them to go, sir?" Garrett
asked.
The sheriff said a lot of the problem is a backup at the
Arkansas Department of Correction. Currently, 33 inmates have been sentenced to serve time
in ADC but have yet to be transported for lack of space.
"The problem is that they'll let 10 inmates out to
White County," Garrett said. "Then, I'll get a call to send 10 down. While those
10 are there, I'll arrest the 10 they let out. It's a very vicious circle."
The jail is so crowded now, Garrett said, that he has found
it impossible to keep inmates separated by classification as to who has been sentenced and
who is still awaiting adjudication.
"Now, the girls and the boys aren't mixed together
guys," he told the justices. "But the inmates are mixed and that's going to
cause us a problem."
He noted that, at the current rate of incarceration, he will
soon be unable to house misdemeanor inmates at all. In that event, Garrett said, police
will be forced to simply write misdemeanor violators a ticket and send them on their way.
"There'll be no deterrent then," he said.
The sheriff said that he will present a proposal next month
for the court to consider. Treasurer Waylon Heathscott, in his report to the court, said
that revenues dropped slightly during the last couple of months of the year, but that
rural population growth helped the county to keep from feeling too much of a pinch. He did
say the revenues exceeded the projections and that the county had headed into 2003 with a
carryover exceeding $1 million.
"The department heads did very good at controlling
expenses," Heathscott said. "Everything looks good for 2003."
The quorum court adopted a resolution in support of locally
elected boards and local governance of public schools and against consolidation of schools
based on an arbitrary number.
|
