TLDR; This amendment does 2 things 1) requires all counties to have sheriffs, which must be elected and 2) Removes the ability of the county District Attorney to remove the sheriff for misconduct.
I like item 1, though,I have concerns that a county may have reasons for such a change that I do not understand. I don't like item 2, because the county has a better idea of what is happening than the AG would have.
Overall, I don’t see what problem is prompting us to modify the underpinning of our government in this instance.
Details:
Currently every county except Riley county has an elected sheriff. This constitutional amendment removes the provision under which *Riley county was able to combine the law enforcement for Manhattan and Ogden with county wide law enforcement and change to an advisory board.
Part 1: People decide who they want as the highest level law enforcement officer in their county seems like a great thing. As always, it’s the second part that has the kicker.
Part 2: Only the AG can issue a conduct challenge for this specific elected position. All other elected positions still follow the usual and customary practice of the District Attorney being able to issue a conduct challenge. This gives me multiple concerns:
- First and foremost being the District Attorney is in that county and knows what goes on there. *
- Second is that it makes all county sheriffs first and foremost beholden to the AG in order to protect their office.
- Third is that this is another amendment that shifts power into a smaller subset of state government.
- The amendment will allow Riley county to move back to having an elected sheriff, if they do, they may not revert back to their current organization.
Bottom line: No - I don't see a reason to modify our constitution for something that is already reality alongside a change the scope of accountability for the office.
Amendment viewable here:
https://sos.ks.gov/elections/22elec/2022-General-Election-Constitutional-Amendment-HCR-5022.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment