Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Sheriff topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents say sheriff's staffing cuts threaten public safety as board and sheriff remain at odds
Summary
Public commenters urged Curry County commissioners to reverse sheriff's-office staffing cuts that they said remove experienced supervisors and investigators; the session included allegations of improper personnel actions and an ongoing legal dispute between the board and Sheriff Ward.
Several Curry County residents used public comment time at the Oct. 1 board meeting to urge the Board of Commissioners to reconsider recent staffing reductions at the Curry County Sheriff’s Office, saying cuts have left the department dangerously understaffed.
Michelle Martin, who said she has lived in Curry County for about 60 years, told the board that reductions affecting longtime employees ‘cannot be understated.’ She highlighted Sergeant Dura Gray’s role as a search-and-rescue coordinator who manages large volunteer crews and named Sergeant Van Zelf as the office’s sole ICAC investigator against child exploitation. “To diminish his role or the significance of their workloads undermines the very fabric of our community safety,” Martin said, and asked the board to provide records on legal expenditures since 2023, including numbers of attorneys hired and costs, by Oct. 15, 2025.
Georgia Cockerham, a Curry County resident from Brookings, accused commissioners of acting illegally in reclassifying and reducing pay for the same sergeant, saying the employee filed a grievance and that union counsel informed her the board had violated the collective bargaining agreement. Wagner further argued the county retained outside counsel despite the county attorney having advised the board the action was unlawful and urged a full forensic audit. Cockerham said the county owed specific district payments and that interest may be due, and she called for public transparency.
The meeting also touched on the board’s broader dispute with Sheriff Ward. At the end of the session an official read a prepared statement from Commissioner Trost (who was absent) describing events that led to a declaratory-judgment filing between the board and Sheriff Ward. That statement said a whistleblower met with a commissioner in September 2024, that county counsel requested documents the sheriff declined to provide, and that when the sheriff would not comply the board filed for a court determination to define roles and responsibilities.
The board did not take any formal personnel action at the meeting. The statement noted a declaratory-judgment ruling was expected the next day. Several public commenters warned that eliminating supervisory posts and investigators could impair local responses to serious crimes and search-and-rescue incidents; the board has not publicly changed course and did not vote on restoring the positions during this session.
