Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County officials weigh who should provide urine-analysis testing after state shift
Summary
Sheridan County commissioners and county attorneys discussed proposals for where UA (urine-analysis) testing should be housed after program changes, debating liability and statutory limits for placing testing in the coroner's office and exploring alternatives including a halftime justice-office hire, sheriff participation or vendor options.
Sheridan County commissioners spent significant time reviewing options for where to house urine-analysis (UA) testing after the state signaled program changes. Staff raised the possibility of the coroner’s office taking on testing duties; county legal counsel said that could exceed the coroner’s statutory duties and expose the county to liability.
A staff member warned that adding testing to the coroner’s duties could remove governmental immunity tied to acting within an office’s statutory scope. County Attorney Diane Bennett said the service is important for courts and public safety and urged finding a way to preserve testing: “UA testing…is an important part. It’s a public serve public safety issue, and it’s an issue to help people, help them stay clean and sober.” Bennett urged exploring options rather than simply relinquishing the service.
Justice Office Administrator Dan Lilly described internal capacity and said the office could consider adding a half-time position to continue testing if it remains in-house. He also noted the justice office is trimming positions but believed a 0.5 FTE addition was plausible to keep services in place.
Commissioners and staff discussed non‑county options including the hospital, VOA and other bonded vendors, and noted some counties (Campbell County was cited) include controlled-substance testing in their 24/7 programs. The board directed staff to convene Dan Lilly, the justice office, the county attorney, the sheriff’s office and the courts to evaluate liability, costs and operational logistics and return with recommendations.
Why it matters: UA testing supports pretrial and treatment decisions; transferring or discontinuing it could affect court operations, costs and community safety. The county flagged statutory limits, insurance/immunity implications and operational capacity as central to choosing a solution.
