_{Thumbnail photo: Screenshot}

The day after an Oregon circuit court judge issued a final ruling that vindicated the Curry County Board of Commissioners, Jay Trost pushed back against accusations that he and his colleagues aren’t transparent.

Speaking from the dais at a meeting Wednesday, Trost noted that it was those accusations that led to a now-abandoned recall campaign against him and his colleague Commissioner Patrick Hollinger. Trost argued that they were the ones being transparent while Sheriff John Ward hasn’t provided a public safety update to the Board in more than a year.

“I’m grateful for the recent ruling and we will now have court-ordered access to the information that we have been requesting for over a year,” Trost said.

In his ruling on Tuesday, Oregon Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Court Judge Martin E. Stone stated that the Board of Commissioners is authorized to order the sheriff to provide documents on request. However, the judge stated that Section 1 of an order the Board made in December 2024 was too broad since those records or documents may be subject to restricted access or may be protected from disclosure under the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Security Policy.

“The court believes that there is a need for an order requiring the sheriff to provide documents and information requested by county counsel or the Board, but not as broad as the wording that appears in Section 1,” Stone wrote in his ruling. “It is clear that the sheriff has not provided a number of documents requested by county counsel related to matters of county concern, county property and (are) within the job duties of counsel, including risk management.”

Stone stated that the Board has the authority to issue an order with wording that allows the sheriff to identify the documents he is restricted from producing, identify the basis for that restriction and discuss it with Fitzgerald, who is county counsel.

“To be clear, such an order must relate to documents and information connected to county property and county concerns,” Stone stated, “not to question the sheriff on how he organizes his office.”

Stone issued his final ruling following a trial on Oct. 29. 

In an opinion issued Oct. 14, Stone stated that most of the conditions in the Board’s order, Order 23510, were lawful, however the Board of Commissioners exceeded its authority by requiring the sheriff to attend their meetings.

In his Oct. 14 letter, Stone stated that the sheriff’s refusal to cooperate with provisions in the Board of Commissioners’ order governing local contract review board rules, the transfer or distribution of county property, employee records needed by the Human Resources Department, compliance with Board policies and access to county vehicles opened the county up to legal liability, including potential litigation.

In a text message to Redwood Voice Community News on Tuesday, Trost said he and his colleagues will draft a new Board order to reflect Stone’s ruling.

On Wednesday, following the judge’s ruling, all three commissioners stated they hoped to be able to resolve their differences with the sheriff and work together. However, they also recapped the year of conflict that included significant budget cuts following the defeat of a tax levy in 2024, a dispute over how much authority the sheriff has over county assets and Ward’s state bar complaint against County Counsel Ted Fitzgerald, which was dismissed in August.

Stone’s ruling gives the Board of Commissioners a better understanding of their roles and responsibilities, Trost said. But both he and Fitzgerald say that the sheriff still refuses to communicate with them.

Trost said he emailed the sheriff right after Stone’s Oct. 14 opinion, urging Ward to comply and work with Fitzgerald to alleviate both parties’ concerns. The sheriff has yet to reply.

After the trial on Oct. 29, Fitzgerald said he had sought CJIS clearance through Curry County Sheriff’s Sgt. Synthia Westerman, who “is in charge of that through dispatch” and was told he would be able to be fingerprinted. Fitzgerald said he was then notified that the sheriff was denying that CJIS clearance.

“I was not aware that I needed to be CJIS cleared until the sheriff told me in the courtroom on the 29th that the reason I wasn’t getting the information that I’m required to have to control the risk to the county … was because I was not CJIS cleared,” Fitzgerald told commissioners. “Now it turns out that the information I’m entitled to isn’t covered by CJIS. But I am concerned that the sheriff made those statements under oath in an attempt to again deny me information, which continues and has continued now for over a year.”

According to Trost, during the trial, the judge asked the sheriff what he believed would be restricted information. One example the sheriff provided, according to Trost, was information related to internal investigations. Trost said internal investigations are not criminal justice investigations and should be afforded to the Board of Commissioners.

Fitzgerald said he never requested CJIS information that he is aware of.

On Monday, Ward called Stone’s ruling disappointing, however he pointed out that the judge had sided with him by stating that the Board of Commissioners could not order him to attend meetings. The sheriff also pointed out that the judge weighed in on whether or not the Board of Commissioners had judicial authority as a county court, which had been an argument from commissioners.

In his Oct. 14 opinion, Stone stated that based on Oregon statute dealing with duties of the sheriff, the Board of Commissioners do not have judicial authority.

“The reference to county court means the county courts that still exist in six other counties of the state and which exercise limited jurisdiction in judicial proceedings such as probate and juvenile cases,” Stone stated in his Oct. 14 opinion. “There is no county court in Curry County that exercises judicial authority and the BOC does not have jurisdiction over judicial proceedings.”

Ward said that he doesn’t contest the other items the Board won summary judgment on, including provision that the sheriff has to comply with county policy concerning the distribution of county property and assets.

When asked about Fitzgerald’s statement regarding trying to obtain CJIS clearance to obtain some information and documents, Ward said that he had reached out to Nicholas Harris, CJIS information security officer for the Oregon State Police.

In a Nov. 3 email to Ward, Harris stated that under the FBI CJIS Security Policy and t, unescorted access to such information is “only granted to individuals whose job role requires direct interaction with (Criminal Justice Information) or the systems supporting it. This includes sworn officers, dispatchers, records clerks and analysts handling Criminal Justice Information. Harris cited the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services Security Policy 6.0 and Role-Based Access Control Standards, which the county adopted and defines access eligibility.

County administrative staff and visitors aren’t eligible for unescorted access to such information and must be “continuously escorted by cleared personnel,” according to Harris’s email.

“While compliance with background checks, training and access control procedures is mandatory, the Sheriff of Curry County retains the ultimate authority to determine who is granted unescorted access to county law enforcement facilities and secure spaces,” Harris told Ward in his email. 

On Monday, Ward told Redwood Voice Community News that Fitzgerald doesn’t have the right to be cleared through CJIS because he doesn’t fit within its guidelines.

“We do the best we can not to violate CJIS rules,” he said. “If we did, we would lose our status and we would not be able to perform our dispatch functions without CJIS. There’s no reason why he needs to be cleared.”

Ward also took issue with a statement Trost made in response to resident Bruce Cockerham, who stated that there was only one patrol deputy working outside of the jail. Trost said he saw four patrol deputies on the scene of a large log that had fallen on U.S. 101.

Ward said his patrol staff currently includes himself, his sergeant and his lieutenant, while other patrol deputies are filling vacancies in the jail. There had been four to five vacancies within the jail, but Ward said he was able to fill most of those vacancies. There are currently two vacant positions within the jail, he said.

“I’m hoping by the end of this year we’ll have our positions filled and start getting the three deputies back on the road,” he said.

As for moving forward, Ward said he’s going to “try to do business as usual.” 

On Wednesday, when it came to revising Board Order 23510, Hollinger said it should state clearly that Fitzgerald is the county’s risk manager. Hollinger also asked Trost what happens if the sheriff continues to refuse to communicate with the Board.

“My understanding is that if there is a continued non-compliance, we would essentially file a motion for contempt,” Trost said, “and then we would be back in court.”