Lake County commissioners vote to reassign jail administration duties

Lake County commissioners voted May 4 on a resolution of intent to reassign administration of the detention center to a separate administrator and to remove administrative control from the Sheriff's Office.  

The commissioners posted an administrative position at the jail on the county’s job website in February and passed the first resolution of intent in March.  

The jail is currently managed by the Lake County Sheriff’s Office and is ultimately the responsibility of the commissioners. Under state law, the commissioners have various avenues to manage the jail, including hiring a private contractor or an administrator to run the facility. 

“I have no question on how important this office is to [Sheriff Don Bell] and how conscientious he is. I have a lot of respect for what he does, but we've had problems in the jail, and we're trying to find a way to address them,” Commissioner Bill Barron said. 

Barron added that he believes an administrator would give the commissioners a “little more say in what’s going on” and be more hands-on, as this would make it a separate department in the county government. Barron said he would like to set up regular meetings with the sheriff, the commission and the new jail administrator to address issues as they arise.  

According to previous Leader reporting, the commission cited multiple reasons for the change, including the current “muddled leadership and accountability,” lawsuits, and a potential change in leadership, since the sheriff’s post is an elected position. Commissioner Gale Decker added during this most recent meeting that their liability insurance provider has paid out $650,000 in claims from the jail.  

Commissioner Steve Stanley raised the first and main concern with this change, which could shift detention officers from the 20-year Sheriffs’ Retirement System to the 30-year Montana Public Employees’ Retirement System.  

Stanley said he believes both law enforcement and detention officers should receive the 20-year retirement plan, and that employees hired under those policies should remain under those benefits. He said he would prefer to nail down whether the retirement plan would change before moving forward with the administrative change.  

Decker said he believes the retirement issue is not a huge factor because most employees were hired between 2024 and 2026, so none would be retiring in the near future. He added that the decision has been under discussion for a while. 

From the commission’s understanding, under Montana law, with this change, the detention officers would not be “sheriff detention officers” and would therefore be covered by the public employee retirement plan. Barron said he does not believe the Montana Legislature intended to exclude detention officers from this benefit.  

He added that they would have to request an attorney general's opinion or work with local legislators to change the law, both of which are time-consuming undertakings. Stanley said he would like to postpone the decision to understand if the change in retirement matters to the current detention officers.  

According to Montana state law, hired detention officers are put into the Sheriffs’ Retirement System, and if an officer was already on the public plan on July 1, 2005, they had the option to switch plans. It also stated that if they were under a public retirement plan in another job, they would switch plans within 90 days of hiring.  

The Leader found no reference to these officers being removed from the Sheriff's Retirement System, and the Montana State website about the system listed detention officers as included in the program.  

Cpl. James Boyd from the dentition center said 20 years of working at the jail is a lifetime. He added that his staff deserves to know what will change with the retirement plan under the new administrative setup.  

Undersheriff Levi Reed also commented that he believes there will be changes to the Sheriff's Retirement System, as paying 40 years of retirement is not sustainable for the county. Reed added that many states are changing retirement from time-based to an age-based minimum.  

Stanley pointed out that if the system changes, it will only affect new employees, not current staff, since the current staff would be grandfathered in, as he has witnessed other retirement plan changes within the county.  

“I’m worried about existing staff,” Stanley said.  

Lt. Fernando Venegas of the Sheriff's Office added that many improvements have occurred at the facility since he has been overseeing it for the past year, and he recommended that the commissioners speak with the officers and inmates who are in the jail.  

Barron said he understands the concerns about this shift in leadership because, when he was sheriff, the county was under a federal court order to change the jail's administration. He said at the time he was convinced he could manage it better than the commissioners.  

However, Barron noted that with the upcoming jail remodel, which will increase the jail capacity, he believes it is the right time to make this change. He said there have been times when the sheriff has changed three election cycles in a row, and while they have Bell for another term, they are unsure of what’s next.  

Decker also supported the decision to proceed with the administrative change. They interviewed the candidates who applied for the job, and Decked said several were qualified and experienced candidates.  

Stanley cast the sole dissenting vote.