NWH publishes sheriff questionnaires

Today's edition of the Northwest Herald includes the responses to questionnaires that were sent to candidates for Sheriff of McHenry County.

I was particularly interested in the incumbent's "non-answer" to the direct question about supporting an Arizona-style law for local law enforcement to enforce federal immigration violations. Keith's true answer would be "No" (he won't support an Arizona-style law).

But why didn't he answer the question? He's willing to "assist" the federal government. That's too much like approving the "concept" of concealed carry. And then he attempted to deflect attention away from the question by wandering off on the jail-bed rental program.

OK, about the jail-bed program. What's going to happen when the federal government opens Thomson Prison over south of Galena that it's buying from the State of Illinois and decides it's a lot cheaper to transport detainees over there and back, compared to forking over $90/day for Keith's hotel. Then McHenry County taxpayers will be sitting on a vacant "hotel" on the third floor of the jail.

The incumbent's top priority is CALEA. Wouldn't you think that CALEA-style thinking would have included ordering Deputy Woods, Sgt. Embry and Lt. Miller to submit written reports about how Woods got injured at the firing range? Do we have a "Don't Ask; Don't Tell" policy right here in McHenry County?

Do you think that, if the Sheriff's Department had required reports in compliance with "comprehensive written directives", then it would be able to make "sound management decisions" about improvements in safety at the range? The incumbent is using all the buzzwords of CALEA, but he's not even following it in the process of applying for accreditation.

I wonder if CALEA is much like ISO 9000/9001, which was described to me years ago as a program of standards on which many could rely. A manufacturer detailed how he made a product. All he had to do was detail it. Even if he made it wrong or it didn't work, "ISO 9000" could still be slapped on - what mattered was the detail.

Does CALEA have standards for nepotism or "very close personal relationships" between employees of different ranks in the Department, including in the Jail? By "close personal relationships" I don't mean just friends. Maybe, "friends with benefits". Or more. Are there CALEA standards about participation in the promotion of a member of the opposite sex with whom a person of higher rank has (or had) a "close personal relationship."

Are new employees being hired because of friendships, relations, or political ties? Just askin'.