Tension over confidential file access may be easing

SANDPOINT — Previously high tensions between Bonner County elected officials may be diminishing as discussions regarding confidential file access remain ongoing.

The situation began in a Feb. 6 email by Deputy Prosecutor Scott Bauer to IT Director Jacob Storms, with multiple other elected officials copied on the email. In the correspondence, Bauer claimed there was prior communication between Sheriff Daryl Wheeler and Storms regarding Bauer’s concerns with “inaccurate and incomplete email productions to the public” as it pertained to public records requests.

Bauer alleged that he had proposed a “standard operating procedure” to ensure accurate responses to public records requests through the Google Vault system, which the county uses to store most, if not all, of its records.

However, the deputy prosecutor claimed that when he attempted to access the Vault, he noticed several changes allegedly made by the IT Department: “The revocation of super-administration privileges previously held by the legal department’s IT staff [and] the restriction placed on the legal department’s administrator, preventing the assignment of role-specific Vault access to [Bauer] as per [his] supervisor’s determination.”

“ … Each elected official bears the responsibility and authority to manage their respective data domains, with particular emphasis on maintaining the confidentiality, integrity and availability of said data,” Bauer wrote in his email.

The deputy prosecutor went on to say that without super-administration access to the Vault, county staff would not be able to monitor whether unauthorized access to the files had been achieved, mainly in regards to the sheriff, prosecutor and coroner’s files.

Bauer requested a response from Storms with a detailed account of what measures he implemented and what caused him to do so, as well as an explanation of why Sgt. Marcus Robbins — the sheriff’s IT person — was not consulted before his access was changed.

On Feb. 20, Deputy Prosecutor Bill Wilson sent an email to Prosecutor Louis Marshall as well as the three commissioners regarding the IT situation.

“As best I can tell, we are at an impasse regarding the IT issue from last week,” he said. “As I understand it, [Robbins] lost his super-admin credentials, at least in part because he was prepared to give [Bauer] ‘role-specific vault access,’ and this was deemed undesirable for a host of reasons.”

At the time, Bauer had one pending lawsuit against the county, and six days later, would file a second one against Deputy Clerk Veronica Dixon. He has since been placed on administrative leave for an indefinite period of time, for unspecified reasons.

Because of this, Wilson proposed a compromise between the divided parties — former administrative access be restored to Robbins as long as he promised not to grant Bauer the enhanced document access that he was hoping to get.

“I would like to think you guys can get on board as well, mainly because [Robbins] has had that level of access for a long time and has always been responsible with it,” Wilson said.

The following day, however, a cease and desist letter by Wheeler, Marshall and Coroner Robert Beers was sent to Commissioner Luke Omodt, who some are alleging unilaterally — in his official capacity as chairman of the board — instructed Storms to remove Robbins’s access to the Vault. The letter demanded that Omodt cease his current behavior and immediately restore Robbins his prior security credentials.

If he didn’t — the trio threatened to sue.

Omodt’s response to the cease and desist letter came three days later, claiming that the board is “responsible for the classification and retention of records.” According to him, Storms did not alter Robbins’s credentials at all, and has been hard at work to tighten the county’s digital security.

“Your cavalier disregard for cybersecurity is not shared by the board of county commissioners, who will continue to protect the interests of all of Bonner County, according to the law,” he wrote in his response.

By March 11, the issue still had not been resolved, according to the prosecutor in a follow-up email. The way the issue had been ignored, he said, “gives the appearance that [Storms] does not in fact work for the elected officials as he has not complied with this demand.” If Storms solely works for the majority of the board of commissioners, Marshall said he felt that was OK.

“However, the other electeds must have IT that has the appropriate access levels — there is no credible security threat with [Robbins] having super user control,” Marshall said. “[Robbins] has decades with this organization with the utmost trust of prosecutors, sheriffs, clerks, coroners and judges. He is beyond reproach.”

Again, the prosecutor said if the issue is not resolved, yet another lawsuit would be in the works against the county.

Omodt responded, asking what access Robbins needed that he didn’t already have — to which he seemingly never got a direct answer to. 

“ … These allegations should be addressed by getting [Robbins] and [Storms] into a room with a computer so that [Robbins] can show what he needs access to,” Omodt said. “ … You want taxpayers to foot the bill for a lawsuit because [Robbins] has the access that he needs but won’t communicate with the Technology Department, who is protecting voter information, tax information and all recorded deeds from being accessed by people who shouldn’t have that access.”

Clerk Mike Rosedale, Assessor Dennis Engelhardt and Commissioner Steve Bradshaw, who were copied on the emails, all agreed that they had no problems with Robbins having super-administration access to the Vault, as they felt that both he and Storms had been nothing but trustworthy in their respective times with the county.

“For some or perhaps many reasons, we collectively are a suspicious lot, so getting [Robbins] and [Storms] together at some point may put to rest some mutual concerns and allow us to focus on more important matters,” Engelhardt said.

Marshall again accused Omodt of making unilateral decisions that affected other departments without first notifying them. This, he said, was an excellent example of why the departments need segregation of their information within the IT Department.

“ … IT shouldn’t be doing things without our permission and our ability to ask questions and have assurance on process,” he said. “We want the status quo returned and then we will be happy to work together to appropriately segregate.”

Omodt did not seem happy with this response, though, and said that since 2022, Storms and his staff have been working extremely hard to ensure the safety and security of Bonner County’s information systems. He was unsure, he said, why that seemed so controversial to so many elected officials.

“Let me assure you, it is not [controversial],” he said. “This is the BOCC protecting the cybersecurity, public monies, voter information and records of Bonner County.”

Omodt said that with approximately $145 million passing through the county in the form of fees, taxes and funds from the state and federal government, he wondered why taking cybersecurity seriously “is not a greater priority for all elected officials.”

“It is your office who put into writing that [Sergeant] Robbins intended to give role-specific access to the Google Vault, that includes attorney-client communications of current and pending litigation, to an individual who is suing Bonner County,” Omodt said to Marshall in a return email.

The commissioner also added that in the past year, there have been over 25,000 unauthorized attempts to gain access to Bonner County’s records and monies, half of which came from foreign countries.

“Bonner County’s physical, network and digital systems infrastructure were neglected — to put it kindly,” he added. “Director Storms and his department have been working diligently to improve the Bonner County system since December of 2022. Instead of attempting to discredit the work of the Technology Department, we should be saying thank you and working together.”

The latter sentiment did not seem like it would ring true, however, when Marshall showed up at Tuesday’s meeting to discuss the agenda item labeled, “Discussion/Decision regarding outside counsel assignment.” Marshall started his statements by saying that not long ago, all of his files, even confidential ones, were kept in a locked filing cabinet in his office that only he had a key to.

“No one ever questioned that,” he said. “No one thought the public should have access to those. No one thought the commissioners should have access to those. It was just clear, and it was defined.”

However, with current technology, that has changed rapidly in the past few decades, and officials have had to adapt to that, which has caused some problems.

While the prosecutor said he had originally shown up to request funding from the commissioners for the sheriff and coroner to seek outside counsel so they could sue the county, Marshall said that request may be premature.

“I don’t think it’s a good thing for the law side of us — the coroner, the sheriff and the prosecutor … to be filing lawsuits,” he said. “It’s a waste.”

Marshall mentioned a meeting — of which it is unclear who attended — that took place last Friday that seemed to prove somewhat beneficial to the situation. Because of this, the prosecutor said he felt it best to step back and see if the Technology Department could resolve the issue on its own, “to give the elected officials what they are desiring,” before legal action was taken.

Because of the seemingly positive direction the issue has taken, Marshall told the board he was not seeking action that day, but wanted the commissioners to keep the issue at the forefront of their minds should it escalate in the future.

“We’re at a point where both sides are actually having a conversation and going, ‘How can we fix this?’” Bradshaw said, which Marshall agreed was proving beneficial.

The prosecutor said he knows the board would deny any request for funding so elected officials could sue their own county, but he is legally bound to ask prior to seeking outside counsel — which he said he does not necessarily want to have to do.

“Hopefully, because of this increased communication Mr. Bradshaw and I were talking about, there’s not going to be any need for this,” he said. “Hopefully a week from now, this won’t be on the agenda.”