This story was published in the Feb. 5, 1995, edition of the Lewiston Tribune.
---
Those grumpy citizens bent on recalling Latah County Sheriff Joe Overstreet say the sheriff's management has caused an expenditure of "thousands of dollars ... in attorney fees and courts settlements." But do we really know that?
The settlements might be 12 cents.
Or $12 million.
Nobody knows with some of these settlements because it has become an outrageous legal fad that all parties agree not to disclose the amount. That shabby practice is not the fault of Overstreet, or of the recallers, for that matter. Overstreet wanted to fight the latest case - an employee who sued because he said he was fired for trying to organize a union. The case was settled last November anyway and the county commissioners and Prosecutor William Thompson Jr. refuse to reveal the amount.
It apparently has something to do with fearing that others inclined to sue the county will get the range of how much they can sue and settle for.
How about the voters being able to get the range of how much money Overstreet's actions have cost the county?
How about the voters being able to judge, by learning the amount, whether the county commissioners, Thompson and the county's insurer made a stupid decision in the amount they settled for?
These cozy conspiracies of silence protect the county officials and their insurers but they deny the public information they need to judge their elected leaders.
How long before somebody in the Idaho Legislature introduces legislation to put a stop to hiding from the voters the amount of settlements that affect county insurance rates and therefore county taxes?
Indeed, a citizen could probably make a strong case in court for outlawing these secrecy agreements when they involve the expenditure of public money. Why don't the Latah recallers attempt something truly constructive like that rather than screwing around with another hysterical recall election based on some peevish personality of the moment? - B.H.
