COUNTY COSTS OF DRUG ENFORCEMENT

​COUNTY COSTS incurred for drug enforcement activities on national forest system lands was discussed at the Sierra County Board of Supervisors’ meeting held in Loyalton on October 18th. Chair Lee Adams stated Sierraville District Ranger Quentin Youngblood wrote a letter to the Board over the Board’s concern regarding the cost of the recent drug enforcement activities. In this letter, Youngblood stated, “While I am also concerned with the expenses which Sierra County is incurring specific to incarceration and prosecution of the offenders for illegal activities of which largely occurred on National Forest System lands, there is no mechanism that I am aware under federal law for reimbursement to a county for the prosecution and housing of inmates convicted of violations of state law.”  He added, “Federal law does authorize the Forest Service to reimburse state and local law enforcement agencies for expenses related to the detection, eradication, and investigation of controlled substance violation on National Forest Lands.” Adams made it clear that all of the decisions made law enforcement wise, were not under Youngblood’s control.  He said the real problem seemed to be the Federal Government does not fully fund the U.S. Attorney’s office and they have high charging standards. Youngblood said one option, though not a mechanism to provide for any meaningful reimbursement would be to take a look at the Drug Eradication Agreement to see if there were any opportunities where money could be added to it. He said he doesn’t think marijuana grows will go away on forest system lands and ultimately feels the forest service is the responsible party. Youngblood concluded that Sierra County definitely had his commitment with these discussions. Adams stated while the forest service distributes money across the country none is put aside for these kinds of things. He said there were two programs at the state level, which are used to help small counties; Homicide Reimbursement Program and State Voting Program. Adams was willing to write a letter, asking the forest service to put some money aside for counties like Sierra in instances like this one. Sierra County Planning Department Director Tim Beals thought the world of Youngblood and didn’t want him to think this was a criticism of him, but was concerned about the impact this had on the County budget and the lack of federal action was offensive to him. He was also concerned about the lack of a meaningful dialog above the district ranger, adding the County should have the ear of the Forest Supervisor. Beals stated if there was such a severe pollution on federal land, why was the federal government not prosecuting on that alone. Adams said this easily could have been a six-figure cost and right now it’s $30,00 to $40,000. He was open to suggestions on where the Board wanted to go with this. He likened the problem to beating a mule in the head with a 2x4, adding it is a learning experience and a tough balance. Adams concluded the problem was how does a county of 3,000 solve it. He had not heard from Congressman LaMalfa and said LaMalfa could call the head of the forest service and “yell,” but by himself it wouldn’t do anything.  Supervisor Jim Beard meant no disrespect to Youngblood but felt this was the second time this year the forest service had slapped Sierra County in the face. He said the forest service had refused to assist with the convicted persons and refused to collect the transient occupancy taxes owed Sierra County. Beard thought maybe the County should pull a New Mexico and seize control of Forest Service land. He thought it was time the County took a stand. Sierra County Sheriff Tim Standley said last year was difficult to work out a cooperative work agreement with the forest service. He added the agreements were met with additional funding and also included a controlled substance grant of $5,000. Standley didn’t have the total cost analysis that all deputies have put in but felt it was over $5,000. He said next year this needed to be vetted in depth, adding the $5,000 is a reimbursement and thought this might be an area they could look at. Adams stated the problem with contracts was they are a set amount each year and felt an emergency fund would help. He worried about the supremacy clause and didn’t think seizing Forest Service lands would be a long-term solution. Beals thought Sierra County should send the federal government a bill. Supervisor Peter Huebner agreed they needed to be more aggressive and send a bill. Sierra County Auditor Van Maddox said to send them a bill as part of a larger plan had value, but on its own it would hit a circular file. He said the next step was to have backing so the “noise gets loud enough to get attention.” Adams asked how much political pressure the County apply. He said Sierra County is part of a nationwide coalition for Secure Rural Schools and may not get it, adding even with statewide pressure we lose these battles.  The Board decided to send a bill and Adams will work on a letter to the regional forester and forest supervisor