EDITOR'S NOTE: Law enforcement jurisdictions across the country are experiencing painful realities based on the sad financial situation they are being presented. And it's not just limited to our urban environments. Here's an example of a sheriff in a small rural county in NW Ohio who's been asked to provide public safety with a budget that's significantly less than last year. I'm told this may mean he'll have the ability to deploy as few as one car county-wide per shift. His response? He's suing the county for more financial support.

by Nancy Whitaker

Paulding Progress

PAULDING COUNTY, OHIO – County Sheriff David Harrow has filed a lawsuit against Paulding County Commissioners Tony Burkley, Tony Zartman and Ed Straley, seeking “appropriate funding” for the sheriff's office.

The suit, filed Thursday, April 22, in Paulding Common Pleas Court, asks for a declaratory judgment for the amount of $51,504. This amount is what is referred to in court documents as a “shortfall” due to a decrease in the sheriff's original budget request.

The sheriff had previously proposed a budget of $1,337,432 for 2010, which was a $150,154 (10 percent) reduction from his 2009 budget.

In response, commissioners only appropriated $1,285,928 for the 2010 budget, which resulted in the $51,504 shortfall that is being asked for in the judgment.

An article printed in the Progress on Dec. 2, 2009 stated the sheriff's department had been slashed $250,000, which amounted to 50 percent of all county budget cuts.

At that time, Sheriff Harrow commented, “Why they expect me to accept more than 50 percent of the entire expected deficit from the county budget is beyond me.”

In another Progress article, dated Jan. 13, the sheriff's office was looking at options in the wake of its budget cuts. Harrow commented in that article, “I submitted a budget with $150,000 reduction. They didn't think that was enough, they cut me another $50,000.”

The five-page complaint states, “The sheriff has requested that the commissioners reconsider their appropriations and fund his office in the amount requested in his budget, but despite a carryover of over $1 million from last year's budget, they refuse to do so.”

The complaint also states that “The effect of the shortfall is that ... road patrols of the county have been severely curtailed and other operations by the sheriff's office have likewise been reduced or will need to be reduced to levels that could jeopardize the sheriff's ability to perform his duties.”

Also, the sheriff's office employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement may be asked to accept a salary reduction, in violation to that agreement, in order to avoid layoffs.

Harrow is being represented by W. Prentice Snow of the law firm of Morrow and Erhard in Newark, Ohio. In a phone interview Friday, Snow told the Progress, “I mailed a letter to the commissioners requesting to meet with them concerning the needed money and the shortfall.

“However, I received a response back from them indicating they had no desire to discuss it.”

Snow said that a sheriff suing a county for funding is very unusual and this is the first time he has been involved in such a case.

Tony Burkley said the commissioners do not yet have an attorney for this case and had no comment.

The county prosecutor cannot represent either party because it is a conflict of interest.