Police Protection and Snowshoe, continued

The below is in reply to questions and concerns put forth by an online user "sideshowbob" regarding the Snowshoe security/police protection issue. I decided to post it here as well since it represents where I think we are on this issue as of 12/1.

Hi sideshowbob,

Thank you for your questions and thoughts, much appreciated.

The decision to change the scope of the duties of the Snowshoe security force was made by Snowshoe. There certainly were, and are, discussions between Snowshoe and the Sheriff (and the county commission) as to how to best deal with security and law enforcement. But regardless, what the decision came down to for Snowshoe was the need for better compliance with state code on the part of Snowshoe and their security force. In short, going forward, I think we are all seeking to follow the letter of the law more closely as to what "security" is allowed to do versus full-fledged "law enforcement". So in my thinking, what was accomplished in the short term is, admittedly, a necessary disruption to the status quo.

Snowshoe is bound by wording in homeowners' deeds to provide security as part of the assessment fee. Similarly, of course the Sheriff is bound by state code to provide law enforcement county-wide. So you can see that, while it was relatively easy to say that we need to make improvements for legality's sake, the hard part is figuring out how to do that in a fair manner for the Snowshoe area as well as all county taxpayers.

In our 12/1 county commission meeting, we continued to discuss options that would allow Snowshoe to use existing assessment monies towards meeting the letter of the law. This is the most desirable approach by all parties at this stage, since this is precisely the way things have always been financed; i.e. there would be no substantive change in spending or where the money comes from. But it isn't clear enough yet that state code and precedence will facilitate this approach. So as a result of the 12/1 commission meeting, our legal council is going to inquire with the state Attorney General on the matter to see if any of our options at present are legally sound.

At the risk of sounding simply politic, the important thing is that we find a way to:

1. address this problem in a completely legal fashion
2. ensure that the Sheriff's department and Snowshoe security have the necessary resources
3. fund operations in a manner that is fair to assessment-paying Snowshoe homeowners as well as tax-paying county residents

I hope the Attorney General can give us some guidance soon on this matter. And I hope this answers some of your questions and concerns. Of course, as you have further thoughts, please let me know. Thanks again sideshowbob.

DF