Unmarked Vehicle Ordinance Tabled Over Traffic Stop Concerns

Twice the commissioners of Lewis County have held hearings to consider passing a law allowing certain uses of unmarked vehicles, and twice now no action has been taken on the issue.

Lewis County’s legislative body has brought forth a proposal to provide an ordinance giving exceptions for a requirement to mark county vehicles, which include some law enforcement, investigative, confidential and short-lease purposes. The meeting was the second held since early January on the matter, which resulted in the issue being held over to a future meeting as several people expressed displeasure with the idea.

This time around, Sheriff Rob Snaza was on hand to give his thoughts and responses to public criticism of the proposal, which centered around using unmarked sheriff’s vehicles for traffic enforcement.

Sheriff Rob Snaza said it isn’t the goal of the sheriff’s office to simply use unmarked law enforcement vehicles to pull people over, and even sympathized with concerns brought up by several people during the public comment portion of the meeting. However, Snaza said, if a detective in an unmarked vehicle would see an obvious traffic violation, that detective would be beholden to the law and should pull the person over in the interest of public safety.

He also said he was sympathetic to people’s caution on the matter.

“I truly understand the concerns of everyone involved in this,” Snaza said. “We’re initiating some town hall meetings and I think it’s important that we discuss these issues. We can have these conversations outwardly.”

The county has tried to adopt the ordinance in response to a situation in Chelan County, where a legal challenge was brought forth by a citizen on the legality of use of an unmarked sheriff’s department vehicle on duty. County civil prosecuting attorney Glenn Carter noted that a state law is already in place governing use of unmarked vehicles.

However, some present noted that traffic enforcement isn’t explicitly stated in the law, but the county ordinance would include a provision for such. Carter said some municipalities have interpreted the state law to allow it, but Lewis County is trying to do its own due diligence on the matter.

“Our interpretation in our office is that we need to ratify and show that we’re certain by adopting this ordinance,” Carter explained.

The concept of public safety was the primary concern of nine of 10 people who commented, imploring commissioners to not pass the ordinance. Similar concerns had prompted commissioners to table a January hearing on the same ordinance and ask Snaza to address people’s apprehensions directly.

Those who spoke out against the proposal stated they didn’t necessarily mind the majority of uses the county proposed in the ordinance — in fact most already being covered under Washington state law — but didn’t like the idea of traffic stops being conducted in unmarked vehicles for fear of police impersonators.

Walt Wilson, of Centralia, stated he served as a police officer and had a simple means of easing those fears during traffic stops.

“When we needed to make a traffic stop and we were in an (unmarked) car, we tried very hard to call a uniform car,” Wilson said. “When you use an unmarked police car you increase the chance of people fleeing … and you increase the chance of danger to the public.”

Snaza said people have a right to drive to a well-lit area, pull over and ask the deputy who conducted the stop to identify themselves with their badge that shows their status as an employee of the sheriff’s office. He even suggested people could call 911 on their cell phone and confirm it in fact is a deputy making the stop, but several commenters countered saying cell phone service isn’t available in many rural areas.

Commissioner Bill Schulte noted that the state law’s provisions are interpreted differently across several jurisdictions, and three local agencies that also conduct traffic stops in unmarked vehicles include the police departments of Centralia and Chehalis, in addition to the Washington State Patrol.

Former county commissioner Ron Averill, the only member of the public to support the proposed ordinance during the meeting, explained in his public comments that the State Patrol utilizes unmarked vehicles as a method of effectively combating road rage, in essence going undercover when responding to a call or observing assaultive behavior.

After the comment period, Schulte and fellow commissioner Gary Stamper addressed the concerns brought up, and recommended tabling the ordinance once again while commissioners work with legal counsel and sheriff’s office officials to find a workable solution.

“Reading this and listening to the questions, I think maybe we need to work this somewhat. We do not come into these hearings with decisions already made,” Schulte said. “There’s no guarantee it’s going to pass today. I ask that we sit with the sheriff’s and prosecutor’s office … and rework this a little bit.”

“I think we probably have some unanswered questions, and with a little more support here we could answer those questions,” Stamper said.

Snaza, in his final comment on the matter, said he hoped to reassure the public that the mission of the sheriff’s office is to protect citizens, not create an atmosphere of fear or uncertainty.

“The sheriff’s office has no intent of establishing a fleet of unmarked cars to go out and stop people,” Snaza said. “The whole purpose of this is to do the right thing. Your concerns are our concerns too.”

Commissioners will revisit the issue for a third time in their March 9 public meeting.

•••

Christopher Brewer: (360) 807-8235