Commissioners approve regional ICAC interlocal agreement despite sheriff saying he will not sign

On March 26, 2025, the Franklin County Board of Commissioners voted to affix the county’s signature to a Southeast Regional Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) interlocal agreement intended to pool regional law-enforcement resources to investigate online child exploitation.

The agreement, presented by Jeff Briggs, was described as an interlocal cooperation arrangement covered by state law and the Mutual Aid/Peace Officer Powers statute. Briggs said the arrangement would create a regional task force to perform sting operations, peer-to-peer undercover chats and regional outreach to prevent youth victimization.

Briggs told the commission the agreement is “covered by the mutual aid, Peace Officer Powers Act, specifically RCW 10 93 130,” and that participation typically involves pooling staff and resources, indemnification language, public-records provisions and other contract terms the Interlocal Cooperation Act requires.

Sheriff (unnamed) told the commissioners he would not sign the document and said the board could not compel his deputies to participate. “I’m not signing that… We already have access to all the equipment that they talk about and all those type of things,” the sheriff said. He added that he has committed deputies “which I legally and lawfully can do” and that his office will continue to participate with ICAC and federal partners as he determines appropriate.

Several commissioners and the county administrator disagreed with the sheriff’s characterization, saying the ILA is a standard contract mechanism counties use to document cooperative arrangements and to provide liability protections for participating jurisdictions and their insurers. County legal counsel and the county administrator said the board’s signature does not, by itself, force a sheriff to assign deputies; rather, the ILA documents mutual expectations among participating agencies.

After discussion, a commissioner moved to “affix our signatures to the Southeast Regional Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force interlocal agreement.” The motion was seconded and commissioners voted in favor; the chair called for the ayes and the motion passed.

The sheriff reiterated that he would not add his signature block and said signing the ILA without the sheriff’s participation would be a “wasted piece of paper.” Commissioners said the agreement is intended to document county-level authorization and to help ensure participating agencies and their risk pools are aligned should task-force operations generate contested legal issues.

The commission did not direct the sheriff to change his position; the record shows the board approved affixing the county’s signature while the sheriff maintained he would not sign and retains authority over deployments in his office.