HB 2765: Clarifying Law Enforcement Authority of State Park Rangers PASSED

[bigtex]

I was always under the impression that most state parks officers who had done acedaemy time were commissioned officers in "the state".  This must be cleaning up some language for those officers without a state law enforcement commission.

Nope this is for all of them. They all go thru an LE academy that is the same length as the state LEO academy. All have a state LE commission.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[bigtex]

So just some more background. In 2004 the Attorney General said under current WA law that Park Rangers had no authority on roads going thru parks such as a county road going through an area with park lands on both sides of the road, couldn't respond to incidents outside of parks unless fully deputized, and couldn't enter into mutual aid agreements unless fully deputized. Prior to 2004 it was a longstanding interpretation that Rangers had such authority.

Today (2/5) the House Public Safety Committee unanimously passed an amended bill which outlines WA STATE Park Ranger authority as the following:
-On State Park lands
-On State Park managed Sno-Parks (does not need to be on State Park lands, simply managed by State Parks which most are)
-On public roadways which bisect park lands (such as a county road with park lands on both sides)
-When deputized by a Sheriff/Police Chief
-In response to a request from an LEO with authority
-In fresh pursuit
-When physical injury to a person or substantial damage to property occurs, or is about to occur, within the presence of the ranger

Realistically, all the bill does is write in law what prior to 2004 was the longstanding interpretation of State Parks law enforcement authority.

This is the first time the House Public Safety Committee has voted unanimously to clarify/increase law enforcement authority of State Parks, Liquor Control, or DNR. The fact that this bill passed unanimously is substantial...

[bigtex]

The substitute bill (post above this one) passed the House today by a vote of 89-8. It now goes to the Senate.

[bearpaw]

I am typically against expansion of LE dominion beyond their scope of competence.  In this instance, it seems like more of a common sense clarification, and the limited expansion that is apparent in the OP, while creating some possibilities for potential abuse, does not seem so unreasonable. 

I voted yes.

agreed

If Kretz sponsored it,  IT is probably something GOOD for the People of WA!!

The other reason I voted yes!

[fireweed]

I've always thought it was odd that a state park had it's own Law Enforcement branch.  Seemed like a waste of money.  If they need patrols, work with counties--There are  many small towns all over the state without police, and the only ones to respond are county deputies.  But since the decided to keep the LEO in state parks, perhaps them being there could go the other way--they can help the county deputies respond in the small towns and rural areas most state parks are located in or near.

[bigtex]

I've always thought it was odd that a state park had it's own Law Enforcement branch.  Seemed like a waste of money.  If they need patrols, work with counties--There are  many small towns all over the state without police, and the only ones to respond are county deputies.  But since the decided to keep the LEO in state parks, perhaps them being there could go the other way--they can help the county deputies respond in the small towns and rural areas most state parks are located in or near.

Almost all of the states have a LE branch for their state parks. In some states a game warden is also a park ranger in that they enforce fish and wildlife laws in their area but they are also responsible for the LE in their park and they live in the park, this is typically seen in less populated states. Many states also have a combined Fish/Wildlife & Parks agency where they have game wardens and park rangers. Colorado was the most recent state that combined their wildlife and parks agencies. In terms of Park Ranger LE authority, WA is in the middle. Some states such as Oregon only give their Rangers ticket authority and only for park violations, other states grant their Park Rangers with full statewide LEO authority.

Under WA law an incorporated city (sometimes referred to as a town) must have a police force. This is done either by the creation of an actual police department or through paying the Sheriff's Office or another city to do the policing. A city cannot simply say that they have no crime and if someone does call 911 the SO can handle it. In unincorporated areas (where there are small unofficial 'towns') it's the SO's responsibility.

[bearpaw]

In my newsletter from Kretz I think he said this is moving forward.

[bigtex]

In my newsletter from Kretz I think he said this is moving forward.

Passed the House has a Senate hearing tomorrow.

[bigtex]

The bill passed out of the Senate Law & Justice Committee today with unanimous support. It now goes before the full Senate for a vote.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[bigtex]

3/2 UPDATE

The substitute bill passed the Senate today with a 46-1 vote. It now goes to Inslee for his signature.

When the new law takes effect State Park Rangers will have authority in the following situations:
-On State Park lands
-On State Park managed Sno-Parks (does not need to be on State Park lands, simply managed by State Parks which most are)
-On public roadways which bisect park lands (such as a county road with park lands on both sides)
-When deputized by a Sheriff/Police Chief
-In response to a request from an LEO with authority
-In fresh pursuit
-When physical injury to a person or substantial damage to property occurs, or is about to occur, within the presence of the ranger

[bigtex]

The governor signed the bill on April 1st. It takes effect June 9th.

[turbo]

I like more cops. Snow parks need help and as a snowmobiler I really want to see more tickets to to losers that don't register there sleds. Tabs pay for all of the grooming directly and the state has never raided that fund believe it or not. It's a direct user fee.