Prosecutors to attend all BOCC meetings

SANDPOINT — Bonner County prosecutors will now be required to attend all Bonner County commissioners’ regular business meetings, including executive sessions, after a motion was approved Tuesday morning.

During the meeting, Commissioner Luke Omodt read Idaho Code 31-2607, which states the prosecuting attorney is the legal advisor for the board, and must “attend their meetings when required and must attend and oppose all claims and accounts against the county when he deems them unjust or illegal.”

Because of this, the commissioner motioned to have legal counsel sit in on all meetings and executive sessions. He felt it pertinent as the three commissioners are tasked with managing roughly $75 million, and he wants to ensure it’s done right.

However, Commissioner Asia Williams said the request could prove to be too taxing on the prosecutors’ schedules, as they have a plethora of other responsibilities to complete. Additionally, she said she wondered why the commissioners would want counsel there when they, more often than not, don’t accept advice given by the counsel.

“This board has historically ignored legal counsel’s advice,” she said.

Williams said the only reason the prosecutors are there now is because of how the board has handled itself during the past year since the current commissioners have been in office.

“Our prosecuting attorney has told this board that they are involved in this board because of the behaviors of the board, way more than they ever have been or ever should be,” she added.

The District 2 commissioner also contended the conversation was inappropriate to have without Prosecutor Louis Marshall present, as he is the one who fully oversees the board, rather than the deputy prosecutor who was currently present, Bill Wilson.

Omodt, however, said he didn’t see it right to do any business with taxpayer money without proper counsel present to step in should the board be suggesting something not in best practice.

“It is of great importance to me that we steward and safeguard the public monies and we make wise and prudent decisions,” he said. “That is the job of counsel.”

The discussion continued, with Williams again contending it would not be the best use of the prosecutors’ time to have any of them sit in on meetings where they might not even be needed, rather than working on other county business and being requested should the need arise.

Deputy prosecutor Bill Wilson also spoke regarding the agenda item, saying the agreement the board has had with him the past few months is that they would call him via phone should they need him. That option, he said, has not been used very often, though.

Additionally, Wilson said should he be required to attend all regular meetings as well as executive sessions, he would appreciate the option to be able to Zoom into the meetings as opposed to being required in person, as it would be more convenient for the rest of his work schedule.

Wilson also quipped that the way the business meeting is structured right now — with the public comment and commissioner reports at the end — would work better with his schedule. While he understands that this structure might be harder for the public in some ways, he said it greatly benefits county employees who need to be at the meetings. Regardless, Wilson said he would attend the meetings in whichever way and at whatever time he was required to do so.

“I’m just offering my position, I’m not pretending that my time is more valuable than everyone else’s in the room,” he said.

However, Wilson did suggest that the “blanket statement” that all executive sessions require counsel be reevaluated, as he has been asked to attend many that he has no input for.

“There are many executive sessions that really don’t have anything to do with legal counsel,” he said.

Because of this, he said sitting in on each session would be inefficient for the prosecutors’ time and requested that that portion of the motion be reworked.

Omodt moved to amend the motion to add “as needed” to the requirement for executive session. There was no second and the amendment died.

Commissioner Steve Bradshaw said he felt it best to have counsel in all the executive sessions because multiple sessions that were held the past year were required to be redone due to the lack of legal counsel in them. This wastes additional time, he said, and would rather require counsel to be present the first time, every time.

Williams also made a motion to amend, asking that the commissioners’ office send a notice to the prosecutor’s office when they are required to attend a meeting, as well as send specific invitations to executive sessions when the commissioners feel that counsel is needed. The amendment also added that public comment and the commissioner reports be moved back to the beginning of the meeting, with a non-negotiable deadline at 10 a.m., “to allow for counsel to be more in control of their day.”

This amendment also received no seconds, and died on the floor.

“Please explain why you won’t shift this to offer greater accommodation when it doesn’t negatively impact this board, but it positively helps the prosecutor’s office,” she asked of her fellow commissioners.

In addition to Bradshaw’s explanation about having to redo executive sessions, he claimed he has called the prosecutor's office several times in the past few months, and has yet to hear back from any phone calls he has made.

“I dare not leave a message because it gets played publicly,” he said. “So that’s why I have very little faith in our legal counsel and our prosecutor’s office.”

Bradshaw elaborated that he has full confidence in Wilson’s abilities to direct the board, but does not agree with who is in charge of the deputy prosecutor.

“We don’t need to start out the year this way,” Williams said. “Accommodate the prosecutor’s office reasonably, or tell us why you can’t do that.”

Despite Williams’s request for further explanation, a roll call vote was taken and the motion passed, with Omodt and Bradshaw voting yes and Williams voting no.