Pierson leaders and residents push back after sheriff's public statements amid contract talks

Mayor Grama Leonard said the council began exploring options for the town's enhanced-services contract because the sheriff's proposed price threatened to consume a large share of Pierson's budget. "The sheriff's office wanted was around $335,000," Leonard said, and adopting that level of enhanced service would take a significant portion of the town's roughly $1 million annual budget.

Leonard told the meeting he received a direct message from Sheriff Chitwood that the sheriff could cancel the contract in 30 days and that the relationship was "over," language the mayor said contradicted the council's stated goal of negotiating a more affordable service. "The town did not say that we wanted to cancel a contract," Leonard said, adding that the council's interest was in exploring different shift patterns or reduced hours to lower costs.

A council member who read a prepared statement said the mayor had received a "bullying text message" from the sheriff and described the sheriff's mailed letter to residents as an attempt to pressure the council. "That letter wasn't just to residents inside Pierson town limits but also to people in Seville and unincorporated Pierson," the council member said, calling the mailer "an effort...meant to pressure and intimidate this council." The councilmember said the town provides the sheriff a free substation and questioned whether some community services had been affected.

Deputy clerk Ryan Smith read the town's follow-up correspondence with the sheriff's office and quoted Chief Deputy Henderson's reply: "We are currently discussing this matter internally to develop a proposal. We will be in touch." Smith said staff had asked whether shorter shifts or fewer days of enhanced service could reduce the annual cost and that the sheriff's office had previously acknowledged it would develop options.

Several residents urged the council to stand firm. Paul Martel recommended using formal letter-writing to elected officials rather than personal attacks: "Let's use the paper and pen to accomplish what we want to accomplish," he said. Mark Clark, who identified himself as having a background in criminal justice, criticized the cost-per-deputy and questioned whether the town was getting commensurate service for the price.

Town Attorney Scott Simpson and staff noted the council complied with contractual notice requirements: the town issued 180 days' notice as the contract specifies, and the council continued paying quarterly invoices while it seeks alternatives. Simpson said the agreement remains in effect at least until the stated expiration date; staff indicated the town paid the quarterly invoice that covers service through late September and that the contract is valid through the November expiration date stated in the contract.

The council did not vote to terminate the contract at the meeting; instead members said they would continue outreach and negotiations with the sheriff's office and pursue alternative coverage options if necessary. The town also said it would provide public records if residents or media request documentation of the correspondence and meetings with the sheriff's office.

What happens next: the council plans further outreach to the sheriff's office for a cost proposal based on alternative shift patterns and will discuss options at future budget hearings. The current enhanced-services contract remains in effect and paid for the coming quarter, according to staff.