McKean County Sheriff Brad Mason is joining sheriffs across the
state in asking Pennsylvania legislators to clarify by statute what
the duties of a sheriff’s office should be.

“There has to be a clarification on what the sheriff is allowed
to do and what the sheriff isn’t allowed to do,” Mason said.

With a recent state Supreme Court decision leaving questions as
to the powers of the sheriffs’ offices, the Pennsylvania Sheriff’s
Association is asking for legislation to define the role of a
sheriff and deputies.

“This Court has determined only that sheriffs are authorized to
issue summons for summary offenses and to make sight arrests for
Vehicle Code violations involving breaches of peace committed in
their presence,” the Supreme Court ruling states. “We note that the
power of sheriffs to arrest for crimes committed in their presence
is no different from that of a private citizen.

“No court has specifically defined what the extent of a
sheriff’s power is with respect to arrest,” the ruling reads.

“We need it clarified by statute,” Mason said. “That sheriffs
and deputies, as long as they have the training, have the same law
enforcement power as anyone else.

“In my opinion, the public expects more from the sheriff’s
departments than what we are doing now,” he added.

While Mason has advocated taking a police role since before he
took office as sheriff in January, he acknowledged Wednesday that
he doesn’t have the manpower to carry out the tasks at this
time.

“There’s a big roadblock with the commissioners,” he said,
explaining the county commissioners – John Egbert, Cliff Lane and
Bruce Burdick – will not approve adding another full-time deputy to
the sheriff’s department.

“The issue of expense, that’s probably a valid point,” Mason
acknowledged. However, he said, there are grants and reimbursements
available from the state for law enforcement duties.

Meanwhile, the issue of an undefined role for sheriffs’
departments in the state is certainly having an impact on McKean
County, Mason said.

“It has been brought up by the management that there is case law
that the deputies don’t have arrest powers. Therefore, it affects
their wages and contract,” he said, expressing frustration that his
deputies – who are armed and, among other things, transport
prisoners to jail and state prison – don’t have treatment equal to
law enforcement personnel.

“It’s been brought up in negotiations. It’s affecting their
ability to get paid for what they do,” Mason added.

In fact, during contract negotiations with County Manager Dick
Casey and Director of Legal Affairs and Human Resources Michele
Alfieri, Mason’s deputies found that even asking for additional
life insurance could be problematic.

Mason said a deputy who had asked for an increase in his
insurance policy was told something to the effect of his job was no
more dangerous than that of a clerical worker.

“To say that to someone who wears a uniform, a badge and a gun,”
Mason said, trailing off in indignation. He mentioned several ways
his deputies endanger their lives to protect others – from
providing courtroom security to handling Protection From Abuse
Orders.

Yet when someone threatens a deputy, Mason has to contact the
state police to investigate.

“A deputy sheriff is just another arm of law enforcement that
has been utilized in the past and could be utilized again,” Mason
said. “If other sheriffs want to do what they’ve been doing, that’s
their prerogative. There are other offices who want to be more
proactive. This (court ruling) hinders that.”

Jim Hazen, executive director of the Pennsylvania Sheriff’s
Association, explained, “what we are attempting to do in the near
future is put forth legislation … that comes out loud and clear. We
are looking to have in the statute the authority of the sheriff
defined.

“Historically, the sheriffs have done criminal work and it’s
never been questioned,” Hazen said. “What we’re going to do
legislatively is have the authority the sheriffs have always held –
and we believe still have – defined in statute.”