SB 6130 & HB 2394 Would Grant More LE Authority to Liquor Officers MAJOR CHANGE

[bigtex]

Please see my posts dated 1/31 and 2/5 for changes to this legislation

Senate Bill 6130 sponsored by Senators Roach (R), Kline (D), and Kohl-Wells (D), as well as House Bill 2394 sponsored by Reps Moscoso (D) Takko (D), Ryu (D), and Hope (R) was introduced today in the legislature. The bills were requested by the Liquor Control Board. These bills would grant full law enforcement authority to Liquor Enforcement Officers of the Washington State Liquor Control Board. Currently these officers only have authority over alcohol, tobacco laws only as they pertain to minors and taxation, and the majority of the drug laws as a result of the marijuana initiative. This bill would put Liquor Enforcement Officers on par with city police, county deputies, etc and would make the LCB join WSP and WDFW as the only two state agencies with full law enforcement authority.

Now last year there was a similar bill in the house. The bill passed out of committee with bipartisan support but did not get voted on in the appropriations (money) committee. So what is different this year:

1- Last year the bill was backed by the agency, but not requested by the agency like this year.

2- This year there is both a House AND a Senate bill

3- This is probably the most important section, and that is money. Under Criminal Justice Training Center (state LE academy) rules when a full authority officer either quits being an LEO or goes to a limited authority agency (liquor control, DNR, State Parks) there is a 2 or 3 year period where their training certification stays active, after that time they would have to attend the law enforcement academy again. So as an example, if a Kittitas Sheriff's Deputy became a DNR Officer then 5 years down the road he wanted to be a deputy again, he would have to go to the academy again, even if he never truly stopped working in LE. So last year the bill had a huge cost because many of the LCB Officers that were prior city officers, deputies, or troopers had gone past that 2/3 year period. So about 97% of the LCB Officers would have to go through the full academy and the state would have to pick up the cost. Under these bills there is a provision that states that if an individual came to the LCB and had already attended the full law enforcement academy they would not have to attend the academy again, the provision goes on to say if an officer had not attended the full law enforcement academy they would have to take a bridge/equivalency academy (this is actually the same thing occurred when the Depts of Fisheries and Wildlife gained full LE authority in the 1980s). The vast majority of LCB Officers fall under the provision of already attending a full academy, those that don’t fall under that bridge/equivalency course which isn’t expensive at all. Under the liquor and marijuana initiatives the LCB is given money for enforcement, and that is where the funding will come for the academy.

Now just for clarification, EVERY LCB Officer has attended some LE academy. For several years the CJTC created a LCB only academy which just covered laws under the LCB authority several officers attended that, a handful of LCB Officers around 2005-7 attended the Idaho police academy, and several are former State Park Rangers, the individuals who attended these “non” full law enforcement academy would take the bridge/equivalency course.

I already posted in another thread, but the LCB will soon pass WDFW as the second largest state LE agency in WA. The liquor and marijuana initiatives put a lot of funding and pressure on the LCB to rigorously enforce public safety laws.

[pianoman9701]

No way. We have enough cops and this would infringe on the authority of the county sheriffs. This bill should be dumped and I'm writing to my Senator and Reps to do so.

[bigtex]

DNR has been trying for several years to get full LE authority, the DNR bill from last year is still active. Parks and LCB jumped in on it last year.

Each year there is less opposition to these bills. Several years ago the WA Sherriff's Association, several Sheriff's themselves, and the Washington Association of Sheriff's and Police Chief's opposed the DNR bill at the hearing.

Last year the DNR, LCB, and Parks bill had a committee hearing the same morning. The only opposition was WASPC and the Skamania County Sheriff. The Skamania County Sheriff is starting to get the reputation of being a radical in Olympia and legislators basically hammered him for turning these bills into a turf war. If you listed to his testimony, which turned into questioning you could hear him get frustrated and become upset.

I think one reason we are seeing less opposition from Sheriff's is for two reasons. One is that Sheriffs are getting younger, a lot of your older "cowboy like" sheriffs are gone, younger LEOs are known for being more supportive of interagency cooperation and supporting other agencies in general. Another is more Sheriff's in WA are former WSP Troopers then ever before, they are generally more supportive of state agencies.

For many years I always said DNR would gain full LE authority before the other agencies, I now think LCB will. Having an agency request this legislation is a HUGE step. Not many legislators oppose agency requested legislation.

[trophyhunt]

No way. We have enough cops and this would infringe on the authority of the county sheriffs. This bill should be dumped and I'm writing to my Senator and Reps to do so.

i have to agree! We don't need any more wanna be cops out there, I'm referring to the parks guys having guns and full LE authority.

[Elkaholic daWg]

No way. We have enough cops and this would infringe on the authority of the county sheriffs. This bill should be dumped and I'm writing to my Senator and Reps to do so.

i have to agree! We don't need any more wanna be cops out there, I'm referring to the parks guys having guns and full LE authority.

Thanks for the alert, now to contact  my legislators. Anything Kline likes I wouldn't

[bigtex]

Last year the DNR, LCB, and Parks bill had a committee hearing the same morning. The only opposition was WASPC and the Skamania County Sheriff. The Skamania County Sheriff is starting to get the reputation of being a radical in Olympia and legislators basically hammered him for turning these bills into a turf war. If you listed to his testimony, which turned into questioning you could hear him get frustrated and become upset.

I actually had the opportunity of running into a law enforcement legislative liaison type person yesterday and this bill came up in the discussion. They said in their opinion WASPC is really starting to look bad in the eyes of the legislators. I guess many legislators are starting to see the only reason they are opposed to such bills is a simply turf war. Last year a Public Safety Committee Representative actually asked the Skamania County Sheriff that if a LCB, DNR, or Parks LEO was behind an obvious DUI driver in his county would he want them to have the authority to pull that person over, the sheriff said no and that he would want his deputies to do so. Supposedly that statement kind of sent a buzz through the legislature. An actual sheriff saying he didn't want a DUI driver to be pulled over simply because the officer worked for LCB, DNR, or Parks. Kind of the opposite of public safety eh?

They also believe that this is the first time an agency has actually requested general authority since around 2002 when WDFW did it.  And the unofficial word is that the LCB will submit this type of legislation every year until it does pass.

[Crunchy]

I would support it, and can see very little harm coming from it.  Not enough good guys out there!!  I do agree that this state has way too many different agencies, and would like to see a push to consolidate efforts.  Too much gets lost from agency to agency.

[washelkhunter]

Sure that's what WA needs alright, more police.   

[KFhunter]

Last year the DNR, LCB, and Parks bill had a committee hearing the same morning. The only opposition was WASPC and the Skamania County Sheriff. The Skamania County Sheriff is starting to get the reputation of being a radical in Olympia and legislators basically hammered him for turning these bills into a turf war. If you listed to his testimony, which turned into questioning you could hear him get frustrated and become upset.

I actually had the opportunity of running into a law enforcement legislative liaison type person yesterday and this bill came up in the discussion. They said in their opinion WASPC is really starting to look bad in the eyes of the legislators. I guess many legislators are starting to see the only reason they are opposed to such bills is a simply turf war. Last year a Public Safety Committee Representative actually asked the Skamania County Sheriff that if a LCB, DNR, or Parks LEO was behind an obvious DUI driver in his county would he want them to have the authority to pull that person over, the sheriff said no and that he would want his deputies to do so. Supposedly that statement kind of sent a buzz through the legislature. An actual sheriff saying he didn't want a DUI driver to be pulled over simply because the officer worked for LCB, DNR, or Parks. Kind of the opposite of public safety eh?

They also believe that this is the first time an agency has actually requested general authority since around 2002 when WDFW did it.  And the unofficial word is that the LCB will submit this type of legislation every year until it does pass.

Then you're going to have the majority of those cases tossed out of court, heck a deputy that does DUI every day has a hard time getting a conviction.  I'm just against this super trooper idea of LE work.   You need specialists who send cases to court and keeps abreast of all the changes and tweaks his/her cases to maximize conviction rates.  I just don't see a LCB officer becoming proficient in bringing cases to the court and getting convictions on things that are outside their area of expertise.

I mean you might as well put them on the water enforcing boater laws     I've had that happen to me, a deputy trying to give me a citation for no life jackets being worn on a boat greater than 19 feet long AND with sleeping quarters! 

[bigtex]

Last year the DNR, LCB, and Parks bill had a committee hearing the same morning. The only opposition was WASPC and the Skamania County Sheriff. The Skamania County Sheriff is starting to get the reputation of being a radical in Olympia and legislators basically hammered him for turning these bills into a turf war. If you listed to his testimony, which turned into questioning you could hear him get frustrated and become upset.

I actually had the opportunity of running into a law enforcement legislative liaison type person yesterday and this bill came up in the discussion. They said in their opinion WASPC is really starting to look bad in the eyes of the legislators. I guess many legislators are starting to see the only reason they are opposed to such bills is a simply turf war. Last year a Public Safety Committee Representative actually asked the Skamania County Sheriff that if a LCB, DNR, or Parks LEO was behind an obvious DUI driver in his county would he want them to have the authority to pull that person over, the sheriff said no and that he would want his deputies to do so. Supposedly that statement kind of sent a buzz through the legislature. An actual sheriff saying he didn't want a DUI driver to be pulled over simply because the officer worked for LCB, DNR, or Parks. Kind of the opposite of public safety eh?

They also believe that this is the first time an agency has actually requested general authority since around 2002 when WDFW did it.  And the unofficial word is that the LCB will submit this type of legislation every year until it does pass.

Then you're going to have the majority of those cases tossed out of court, heck a deputy that does DUI every day has a hard time getting a conviction.  I'm just against this super trooper idea of LE work.   You need specialists who send cases to court and keeps abreast of all the changes and tweaks his/her cases to maximize conviction rates.  I just don't see a LCB officer becoming proficient in bringing cases to the court and getting convictions on things that are outside their area of expertise.

I agree and disagree with you. What agency is the biggest "feeder" for LCB (as well as DNR) Officers? WSP. Pretty sure every WSP Trooper arrested a couple DUI's in their years. Every officer, doesn't matter if your a deputy, trooper, or city officer has their expertise. But just because a Deputy is good at drug enforcement, doesn't mean they shouldn't do DUI's or respond to domestics.

You run yourself into trouble when you start judging people by their agency and not the individual officer. One of the best DUI officers in King County for several years was a State Park Ranger at Flaming Geyser. There are WDFW Officers who would sh** their pants if they had to do process a DUI, others could do it with their eyes closed.

[KFhunter]

What do you suggest to keep someone with no experience enforcing a law they know nothing about if not by agency?

I know of no testing or grading, or other crediting system that enables an officer to enforce a law they have no clue about, worse if the LCB gets this authority then we could see stat driven enforcement to "validate" their reasoning for this SB 6130 and HB 2394.

This would force officers with little to no experience enforcing a law in a field they know nothing about.  DUI might not be a good example,  how about chasing down a kid on an ATV?
I've witness that too where an agency not normally enforcing such a law chases a kid on an ATV to the point the kid is going to kill himself or be severely hurt.  They were chasing this kid down the railroad tracks and he had no helmet on!  He was a little feller too.


BAD BAD ju ju to chase a kid and have him become a vegetable with a brain injury


That dumb expletive was running full lights and sliding that g-ride around trying to catch that kid,  I was shaking my head 


Some of this stuff might look good on paper but you get out in the field and see some of this stuff in practice and you wonder what the heck were they thinking??

[Jingles]

HE77 just make everyone a full authority Law enforcement officer unless they have been convicted of a felony.

[bigtex]

What do you suggest to keep someone with no experience enforcing a law they know nothing about if not by agency?

I know of no testing or grading, or other crediting system that enables an officer to enforce a law they have no clue about, worse if the LCB gets this authority then we could see stat driven enforcement to "validate" their reasoning for this SB 6130 and HB 2394.

This would force officers with little to no experience enforcing a law in a field they know nothing about.  DUI might not be a good example,  how about chasing down a kid on an ATV?

The large majority of LCB Officers are previous full authority officers who simply moved to the LCB, they've been through the full academy. They've been trained to handle everything just like a county deputy or PD officer. Those that didn't attend the full academy will go to a specialized bridge/equivalency course to train them on the new laws they will be enforcing, which is exactly what happened when the Departments of Fisheries and Wildlife received more authority in the 1980s. Very few LCB Officers have spent their entire LE career with the LCB, most started with WSP, a PD, or SO.

[KFhunter]

Thanks BT

[Atroxus]

We have enough full authority LE organizations in this state already.  If we need more of these types of officers, then they should hire more WSP and/or WDFW officers.