Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Corrections Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cowlitz County staff recommend ending out‑of‑county juvenile detention contracts amid litigation risk; board to decide on notice period
Summary
County staff and the risk pool urged commissioners to terminate detention agreements with Pacific and Wiccaichem counties because of potential long‑term liability; the board was asked to direct whether a 60‑day notice should use calendar or business days ahead of a planned decision on the contracts.
County juvenile court staff and risk managers recommended the Board of Commissioners consider terminating intercounty juvenile detention contracts, citing long‑term liability and risk‑pool concerns.
George Moya, juvenile court, told the board that two motion items on tomorrow’s agenda concern contracts with Pacific and Wiccaichem counties and that his office had coordinated with risk management and legal counsel since the items were continued from April. He said the county’s risk pool recommended termination because exposure to future claims and litigation could be significant.
Moya asked the board for direction on the logistics of termination, noting contracts include a 60‑day written notice clause but do not specify whether those are calendar days or business days; he said that difference would change the effective date of a notice materially.
Scott Jaco, present from Wiccaichem County, said his board would consider contract amendments—covering the county self‑insured retention or adjusting the per‑diem—if Cowlitz would add language to shift some insurance or cost obligations. "We would be willing to cover our SIR should something happen," he said, and asked Cowlitz to consider contract amendments that could save the agreement.
Shelly Pierce, Cowlitz County risk manager, reported the county risk pool has more than 200 SIR claims and cautioned that SIRs and litigation can surface decades later; she said the risk pool recommended dissolving relationships like these because the long‑term fiscal impact is uncertain and potentially large.
Moya said the contracts are technically expired but the county continues to provide services under existing terms until the board takes action and that a formal board direction is needed on the effective timing of any termination notice.
Commissioners did not vote on the contracts during the meeting; they signaled they would hear the motion items at the next meeting as scheduled and requested additional information on insurance and cost implications.
