Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ordinance Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debates moving sheriff hiring rules out of ordinance and clarifying 'work rules' vs. policy
Summary
Committee reviewed proposed changes to the Richland County sheriff's department ordinance (packet references Ordinance 89-7) that would remove hiring procedures from code and debated how and when department work rules should be reported to the board; the county attorney recommended placing managerial work rules in handbook/policy while preserving board authority for higher-level policy.
The committee discussed draft edits to the Richland County Sheriff's Department ordinance (packet reference labeled Ordinance 89-7) and whether the hiring process belongs in the county code or in administrative policy.
The county attorney summarized the major proposed change: "the hiring process is removed entirely," explaining the rationale that day-to-day work rules are better maintained in a handbook or department policy so they can be updated as law enforcement practice changes. He said the board retains ultimate authority to act if a work rule conflicts with statutory duties or county policy.
Members debated where the line should be drawn between a department's operational work rules and board-level policy. One committee member asked whether routine operational changes would require notification to committee chairs and whether that approach would become cumbersome. Another member said the committee's role is to provide oversight while allowing department heads discretion for routine management.
The sheriff noted some work rules have not changed since 1996 and outlined examples that would plausibly be considered work rules (for example, requirements to wear duty equipment). The county attorney and others recommended creating clear definitions and a process for notifying committee leadership when potentially controversial changes are planned.
No ordinance amendment was adopted. The committee directed staff and the attorney to prepare: a set of clear definitions distinguishing board policy from department work rules; proposed language for the county handbook; and suggested notification procedures to ensure transparency for changes that may raise public interest or committee concern. The item was continued for further review.
Next procedural step: attorney and sheriff to meet and prepare clarified language and recommendations to return to the committee for possible referral to the full board.
