So, what's up with the Clark County Sheriff's Office?

.
They haven't been real high on my list since the Nolans moved to La Center to become hysterically vocal shills for the tribe, doing all they can to sell us out for the megacasino in return for a tribal funded (and, no doubt, controlled) 17 FTE's or so.

There are other issues... but really, for me, I don't need more than that one betrayal.

That said, Garry Lucas' shop appears to have "got stuck on stupid" when it came to the issue of transparency, most recently abused by the democratian and the legislative democrats in their mighty efforts to cover for Jim Jacks' alcohol-fueled misconduct, an ongoing effort that proves democrat State Rep. Sharon Wylie, who famously lied that democrats believe in transparency, to be delusional in frightening ways when she'll lie like that BEFORE she gets the job.

Marcus Griffith over at VanVoice asks a few questions that Lucas, et al, refuse to answer.  I hate it when government lies or covers up.  And in this case, the tap dancing, shucking and jiving going on in the CCSO bears examination.

Actions of Sheriff's Office may violate state open government laws

by MARCUS GRIFFITH

Unsatisfactory inspection: Details of the 1999 contract between the Clark County Sheriff's Office and a private company include allowing the company to dictate which public records the Sheriff's Office can release and the "right" to close public meetings to the public. Sheriff department staff claim the contract is current and the provisions are still in effect.

The quest for public records is getting serious as the Clark County Sheriff’s Office (CCSO) seems unable to fully explain its decision to withhold public records or why it agreed to let a private company decide which public records are disclosed.

The CCSO formally denied a public records request I filed in mid-April and is potentially withholding requested records identified in a seperate late April request.

True to my tenacious self, I submitted an appeal to the Sheriff’s Office today. For clarification, I was acting as freelance journalist and not a representative of The Vancouver Voice. The appeal will be made public later this week.

Ironically, the MIA documents pertain to the CCSO’s ongoing recertification through the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc (CALEA), a private non-profit company that strives to ensure law enforcement agencies are meeting professional standards, including transparency requirements.

In a May 4 denial letter, the CCSO stated, “Your request was denied based on the following RCW exemption(s) pertaining to public disclosure: … CALEA Standards for Law Enforcement Agencies and related materials are protected by U.S. and International Copyright Laws and must be obtained directly from CALEA.”

Despite the wording of the CCSO’s letter, no state law (i.e. RCW) was listed. Previously, CCSO staff referenced a contract with CALEA that prohibits the release of so-called “copyright protected” CALEA related documents.

More:

With any luck at all, Lucas will wise up and cough up whatever Marcus is looking for.  Because the department splatter and the waste of our dollars in the inevitable loss will not be pretty if he doesn't.
.