The Walla Walla County Board of Commissioners postponed action Monday on a sheriff-led proposal to privatize courthouse security after residents raised safety and accountability concerns and commissioners asked the sheriff for cost estimates and more stakeholder input.

The issue was raised during public comment and returned to the agenda after a closed session. "I am against the contracting of Social Security personnel to a private company," resident Clint Rain said in public comment, adding concerns about firearms, accountability and loyalty of contracted staff. Resident Katie Donlin worried that private job postings had appeared online before county approval and said the possibility of confidential court information being mishandled was "a real possibility." Resident Stacy McPherson asked for clearer input from the judges who requested additional security.

Why it matters: Commissioners and the sheriff framed the item as a response to persistent staffing shortages that have left the courts unevenly protected. The sheriff said the office currently staffs two full-time and one part-time court security officer and has struggled to recruit replacements; the sheriff proposed transitioning to a private contractor effective Oct. 31, 2025, to ensure steady coverage. Commissioners said they need cost comparisons, written recommendations from the court security committee and clearer involvement from the judges before voting.

Discussion and next steps: The sheriff described the operational problem as a lack of sufficient, available personnel and said private security candidates in Washington must meet state training standards, including firearms certification through the Criminal Justice Training Commission (CJTC). "Private security companies in the state of Washington do have to certify through armed security, have to certify through CJTC, which is the exact same as our law enforcement," Chairman Gunnar Fulmer said while answering a public comment.

Commissioner Clayton said she was not prepared to approve the proposal, calling the submitted five-sentence plan "underdeveloped" and asking why the county had not first solicited detailed input from the court security committee established by the court-security rule (referred to in discussion as General Rule 36). Clayton also requested a formal cost comparison and stakeholder outreach including the presiding judge and court staff. Commissioner Kimball said he shared concerns about local jobs but favored further analysis and recommended issuing a request for qualifications or proposals if the board decided to proceed.

No formal action was taken. Commissioners directed the sheriff to provide a clearer cost comparison and implementation plan and scheduled further discussion. The board agreed to revisit the item at a specially scheduled meeting the next day and asked the sheriff to try to have numbers available for that meeting.

Public comment and accountability: Multiple residents asked for an additional public meeting with at least 30 days' notice before any privatization decision. The board and sheriff acknowledged the public interest and said additional outreach and documentation would be appropriate if the board moves forward.

The board did not adopt any ordinance or contract Monday; instead it requested more documentation and deferred the decision while emphasizing the courthouse's continuing need for reliable, daily security coverage.