Brittany Voie Commentary: Rep. Sutherland Should Formally Respond to WASPC, Show Respect to Law Enforcement

Posted

In all the conversations surrounding Rep. Robert Sutherland’s “goons with guns” statements a few weeks back, there was one piece of the conversation that, in my opinion, hasn’t gotten enough attention yet.

On April 20, just one day after Sutherland’s “goons with guns” comments (which he has since expressed regret for using that particular label), the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs (WASPC) issued a formal letter to Rep. Sutherland, asking him for formal clarification of his comments, as they appeared to insinuate violence against law enforcement.

Now, WASPC is a statewide agency, with an executive board, that advocates on behalf of law enforcement at the state and legislative levels. So, I think it’s fair to say that they are a pretty big voice at the table when it comes to representing law enforcement. Sheriff John Snaza, Thurston County Sheriff, is the current president of the WASPC executive board.

So, that letter to Rep. Sutherland on a Monday. When WASPC didn’t hear back from Rep. Sutherland by Thursday, April 23, they issued a second letter again asking for formal comment. When that second letter went unanswered, they issued a third formal request to Sutherland’s office the following week, on May 1.

In Sutherland’s defense, he claims that, rather than contacting and responding to WASPC directly, he connected with WASPC Board President John Snaza “immediately” after the first letter was issued from WASPC.

But Sheriff Snaza was on KIRO Radio with “Gee and Ursula” the Friday after the second letter was issued and indicated that, at that point, Rep. Sutherland still had not issued formal response.

WASPC emails do indicate that Sheriff Snaza and Rep. Sutherland did connect over the phone at some point, but WASPC still expected formal written response on the matter, as opposed to informal and non-specific posts on social media. WASPC’s response to Sutherland’s claims of sufficient clarification were met with strong words.

“Having made clear that you will not provide any written response for our Chiefs and Sheriffs, or any of the 11,000 men and women in law enforcement, I will provide the above voicemail summary to our WASPC members and let them know no written response will be forthcoming. I will also make clear to our Chiefs and Sheriffs that there appears to be no clarification or clear response of whether or not you advocate violence against law enforcement. I have spoken with Sheriff Snaza and he agrees that there was no clarification of this point made during your conversation with him. As we have made clear, we do not take issue with political opinions or disagreements with the Governor’s Order. We do take issue with an elected state legislator making statements publicly that may advocate for violence against law enforcement,” states the response, authored by Steven D. Strachan, Executive Director of WASPC.



Sutherland’s response to that was tense. In fact, his email goes on the offensive against WASPC, attempting to turn the tables and place fault on the organization for pressing him. The litany of deflections are pretty astounding.

Regardless of what Rep. Sutherland is saying on Facebook publicly, the conversations behind closed doors tell another story.

I think WASPC’s final comments on the matter say it best: “We take very seriously statements that advocate, or appear to advocate, for violence against our officers – especially when those statements are made by an elected official. It is unacceptable in any circumstance, and should be condemned in every circumstance.”

 

•••

Brittany Voie is a columnist for The Chronicle. She lives south of Chehalis with her husband and two young sons. She welcomes correspondence from the community at voiedevelopment@comcast.net.