View your personalized ballot, check your voter registration, make a plan to vote, and research every name and measure on the ballot with BallotReady.
Get StartedI support keeping a standalone public safety answering point, our 911 dispatch center, here in Grand County, provided we can run it effectively and sustainably. Some background: Grand County currently operates its own dispatch center out of the Sheriff's Office. There are regional alternatives, consolidated centers managed by the Utah Department of Public Safety, such as the one in Price that San Juan County recently joined,and those models carry real pros and cons. Dispatch is one of the most technical, expensive, and hard-to-staff functions in all of public safety, and it is also one of the most critical: every 911 call has to be routed correctly and answered by someone able to respond quickly and capably, whether the caller is in a car accident, a medical emergency, or a domestic assault. The most common worry about losing local dispatch is that out-of-area dispatchers won't know our geography. Modern technology, Next Generation 911 and ANI/ALI location systems, addresses much of that with accurate location data, and the truly hard cases, like backcountry rescues where callers don't know where they are, are difficult regardless of where dispatch is housed. What I will not do is allow a substandard dispatch operation. These are the people on the front line when someone calls in screaming for help, and putting them in that seat without the right tools fails both them and the public. If we keep dispatch local, we have to be honest and prepared about paying for it, and that is a public discussion, not a back-room one. My first step would be to evaluate the system thoroughly, drawing on my own experience managing the second-largest communications center in the state along with outside experts, and to consult the community before any decision is made. But my preference is clear: keep it here, and do it right. Learn more
Consolidating law enforcement services is not the Sheriff's decision to make. That authority rests with elected city and county leadership, not with me, and not with any sheriff. I want that to be the first thing people hear, because a great deal of anxiety on this issue rests on a basic misunderstanding of who actually holds the power to do it. Here is what I do believe: consolidation, done right, can produce real efficiencies, cost savings, better communication, and stronger operations. I know this directly, because I founded the Unified Police Department of Greater Salt Lake, which merged the county sheriff's office with several municipalities and achieved exactly those goals. But I also learned firsthand that these models are only as durable as the political will behind them. Cities tend to join when they're under fiscal pressure and to leave when revenues recover or leadership changes, because communities understandably value local control. That makes any such model inherently tentative, it is held together by the choices of city councils and county commissions, not by a sheriff. Learn more
So my position is practical. Rather than make promises the office has no power to keep, I believe Grand County must prepare, training our deputies and supervisors on exactly what we can and cannot lawfully do when and if ICE arrives. If ICE comes with a warrant signed by a judge, the county's role is to support the agency's safety and security, but not to carry out its mission for it. If ICE instead conducts an indiscriminate roundup without judicial warrants, our role is to stand by, monitor, and protect people's rights, ensuring, for example, that private spaces are not entered without a judge-signed warrant, and documenting any mistreatment for later follow-up. I'll say plainly that in its current operations, ICE too often walks the line of constitutional protection, and in my view has at times exceeded its constitutional authority. The Sheriff cannot stop federal action. What the Sheriff can do is protect this community and safeguard everyone's rights throughout it,and that is exactly what I will do. Learn more
Yes. I support building a new public safety facility for Grand County, and I support a responsible mechanism to pay for it. My concerns are not with whether we do this,they are with how it has been handled. The need is real and not in dispute. The Sheriff's Office facilities are genuinely substandard, with documented deficiencies and real liability exposure. And the funding tool on the table,the 0.3% fixed guideway sales tax,is a sound approach: roughly 70–80% of it would be borne by visitors rather than residents, and it would generate close to 2 million a year while exempting gas and unprepared food. I agree with the Commission's desire to move forward. Where I strongly disagree is with the messaging, which has been poor. The public has been told very little about what the building actually is, who it would house, what functions it would serve, or what it will cost,and a large share of the responsibility for that communication rests with the Sheriff's Office, which has been largely absent from it. If any governing body is going to ask the public for new revenue, it owes the public transparency and clarity in return. Learn more
View your personalized ballot, check your voter registration, make a plan to vote, and research every name and measure on the ballot with BallotReady.