SB 5399 Liquor Control Board Officers

[bigtex]

Background history:
-Prior to 2012 Liquor Control Board Officers could only enforce alcohol and some tobacco laws
-Marijuana initiative allowed LCB Officers to enforce all drug laws found under RCW 69.50, such as cocaine, meth, etc
-2013 the LCB Officer's union spearheaded a bill that would give LCB Officers full police officer authority. The bill passed out of the House Public Safety Committee but got held up in a budget committee
-2014 the LCB as an agency requested the legislature give LCB Officers full police officer authority. The bill was later amended to only give LCB Officers additional authority over general crimes as found in RCW 9 and 9A and traffic offenses.

TODAY

SB 5399 was introduced by Senators Conway, Rivers, and Hasegawa as requested by the LCB. The bill is similar to the end result of last year's amended bill. LCB officers would only gain authority over RCW 9, 9A (general crimes) and 46 (traffic). They will remain as limited authority peace officers.

http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2015-16/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5399.pdf

[bigtex]

House Bill 1537 was introduced today which mirrors the Senate Bill.

[bigtex]

Are the State Liquor Agents required to be graduates of a certified State Police Academy?

Yup.

All newly hired Liquor Enforcement Officers (haven't been called agents in about 15 years) attend the same academy as deputies and city officers. Most officers are actually retired troopers, city cops, or deputies.

[bigtex]

All "Newly Hired Officers" what about the existing inventory, when do they head out to Police academy and at what expense?

Sorry I worded it wrong. They all have been. Those who are former troopers didn't go to the Basic Law Enforcement Academy (BLEA) they went to a WSP academy. But this is the same for any agency in WA. Every LCB Officer has gone through some form of an academy. Those newly hired go through the same one as everyone else (except WSP).

There is no $ impact to this bill.

[Special T]

Didnt they try this bill last year? year before?

[bigtex]

Didnt they try this bill last year? year before?

If you read the original post you can see there is a difference between the past bills. From what I understand this bill will continue to be brought up every year until it passes.

[whacker1]

what would be the pro / con arguments?

I need help understanding where each perspective is coming from and the need to make the change.

[Caseyd]

Soon to be the states second biggest agency

[bigtex]

what would be the pro / con arguments?

I need help understanding where each perspective is coming from and the need to make the change.

Right now say a LCB Officer is in a bar and a fight breaks out. The LCB Officer has no more legal standing to break up the fight and detain or arrest someone in this situation then a common citizen. The reason is because an assault, even in a bar, is not an alcohol, tobacco, or drug violation. In fact in this situation the LCB Officer could go arrest a bartender/security guard for allowing the fight to happen rather than actually arresting the aggressor in the fight. So you think of all the general crimes that occur inside or near establishments that sell alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana and realistically not many of those things are under the alcohol, tobacco, or marijuana laws.

On the traffic side if an LCB Officer is driving down the road behind an aggressive driver, potential DUI, etc all they can do is call 911 and report it. They can't initiate their lights and pull them over.

What this law would do is allow the LCB Officer to pull over the DUI driver, arrest the guy in the bar fight, arrest the drunk guy outside the club who punched his girlfriend, etc.

These are state officers with full law enforcement academies, vehicles with lights and are dispatched by WSP. They just can't do anything outside of alcohol, tobacco, and drug violations.

I've been in favor of this idea for years.

[bigtex]

Soon to be the states second biggest agency

All because the legalization of marijuana and privatization of liquor sales.

[whacker1]

what would be the pro / con arguments?

I need help understanding where each perspective is coming from and the need to make the change.

Right now say a LCB Officer is in a bar and a fight breaks out. The LCB Officer has no more legal standing to break up the fight and detain or arrest someone in this situation then a common citizen. The reason is because an assault, even in a bar, is not an alcohol, tobacco, or drug violation. In fact in this situation the LCB Officer could go arrest a bartender/security guard for allowing the fight to happen rather than actually arresting the aggressor in the fight. So you think of all the general crimes that occur inside or near establishments that sell alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana and realistically not many of those things are under the alcohol, tobacco, or marijuana laws.

On the traffic side if an LCB Officer is driving down the road behind an aggressive driver, potential DUI, etc all they can do is call 911 and report it. They can't initiate their lights and pull them over.

What this law would do is allow the LCB Officer to pull over the DUI driver, arrest the guy in the bar fight, arrest the drunk guy outside the club who punched his girlfriend, etc.

These are state officers with full law enforcement academies, vehicles with lights and are dispatched by WSP. They just can't do anything outside of alcohol, tobacco, and drug violations.

I've been in favor of this idea for years.

What does the opposition say?

[bigtex]

what would be the pro / con arguments?

I need help understanding where each perspective is coming from and the need to make the change.

Right now say a LCB Officer is in a bar and a fight breaks out. The LCB Officer has no more legal standing to break up the fight and detain or arrest someone in this situation then a common citizen. The reason is because an assault, even in a bar, is not an alcohol, tobacco, or drug violation. In fact in this situation the LCB Officer could go arrest a bartender/security guard for allowing the fight to happen rather than actually arresting the aggressor in the fight. So you think of all the general crimes that occur inside or near establishments that sell alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana and realistically not many of those things are under the alcohol, tobacco, or marijuana laws.

On the traffic side if an LCB Officer is driving down the road behind an aggressive driver, potential DUI, etc all they can do is call 911 and report it. They can't initiate their lights and pull them over.

What this law would do is allow the LCB Officer to pull over the DUI driver, arrest the guy in the bar fight, arrest the drunk guy outside the club who punched his girlfriend, etc.

These are state officers with full law enforcement academies, vehicles with lights and are dispatched by WSP. They just can't do anything outside of alcohol, tobacco, and drug violations.

I've been in favor of this idea for years.

What does the opposition say?

They can call 911 like anyone else.

Realistically all it does it tie up resources from two agencies when the situation can be handled by one. In the example of the fight the LCB Officer would have to call an outside agency to arrest the guy, the LCB Officer would have to write a witness statement, etc. In comparison to just going over grabbing the guy and arresting him.

Realistically it's just a pissing match between some sheriff's who don't want another agency with more authority over something. In no way does it remove sheriff's from having authority, realistically it's just another officer on the street who can help out. There's LCB Officers working at 2:30 AM where there are no troopers, city officers, or county deputies working because that area doesn't have 24/7 coverage. Wouldn't it be nice just for the LCB Officer just to handle the situation themselves.

Most states have realized that if you guy a guy a badge, gun, lights, etc and call them a law enforcement officer then they should be able to enforce all laws. Utah and Texas are obviously very conservative states, both have full authority liquor enforcement officers. Even in this bill passes it wont give LCB Officers full police authority. Yes agencies can have their focus, such as WDFW on fish and wildlife. But why give someone all the tools and then say well you can only really enforce 10% of the laws and all the other stuff you have to turn a blind eye to? That's the situation LCB Officers are in right now.

[whacker1]

thank you for sharing

[Eli346]

 I know a lot of bar owners from my line of work. I've heard quite a few stories of LCB officers that seem to have some sort of personal agenda in enforcing laws. I know this is just one side of the story but after hearing and seeing some of the stuff that goes on for the past 30 years I don't really feel comfortable giving them this much power.

[DOUBLELUNG]

I'm not opposed to the bill, but a couple things I do remember, for consideration:  several years ago, a German tourist was murdered on the highway in Florida.  The governor pulled all Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission officers off natural resources protection and assigned them to protect people at highway rest areas.  I'm not too sure how long that lasted.  In the other case, within the last couple of years, the Chief of the Alaska State Troopers took all of the brown shirt troopers off wildlife patrol and investigations, to concentrate on "serious" crime.  Not sure how long that lasted either.