Current conditions unavailable
It is now officially a misdemeanor punishable by up to 90 days in prison, a $1,000 fine or both to expose a child or other dependent to synthetic opioids in Lewis County.
Local officials believe the policy fills a gap in state law.
“The heart of this ordinance seeks to fill a gap that exists for a law that is already implemented at the state level,” Lewis County Civil Prosecuting Attorney Scott Gripp said during a Lewis County Board of Commissioners meeting on Tuesday.
During that meeting, the Board of Commissioners followed through on plans to enact a local ordinance that establishes charges and penalties for endangerment with an opioid controlled substance.
Lewis County Commissioners Scott Brummer and Sean Swope voted in favor of the ordinance.
Commissioner Lindsey Pollock was not present for the meeting.
Swope proposed the new local law.
“I had the opportunity to speak with both our legal counsel and with law enforcement over this and the way it's written, and I am fully in support and comfortable with the language we are presenting,” Brummer said.
Lewis County Ordinance 1384 establishes Chapter 9.50 of Lewis County Code titled “Mistreatment of Children and Dependent Persons.” The code concerns endangerment with schedule I and schedule II opioids, which include heroin, methylfentanyl, fentanyl, methadone and others.
The law also mandates law enforcement making an arrest related to the code to notify Child Protective Services. The code is also careful to differentiate endangerment from caring for a child or dependent adult by providing them with medications prescribed by a “prescriber of controlled substances.”
To preempt questions from the public, Gripp during a staff briefing of the ordinance clarified that the local code is establishing the crime as a misdemeanor because the county does not have the authority to make it a more serious offense.
“It's distinct from the state law in that it is not a felony offense,” Gripp said. “It cannot be because the state has not granted the authority to the county to do so, but it is a misdemeanor offense.”
A similar law is already established and implemented at the state level, but without including some of the substances now included in the local version.
Local Washington state Sen. John Braun, R-Centralia, has for the state's last two legislative sessions been the prime sponsor of Senate Bill 5071, which would expand the state-level charge to include synthetic opioids. The bill has passed the Washington state Senate with large bipartisan majorities in both sessions, but failed to receive even a hearing in the Washington state House of Representatives.
Also seeking to preempt some questions from the public, Swope asked Gripp to explain why the local ordinance did not include a longer list of substances, such as cocaine. According to Gripp, the current ordinance is justified by a “particular problem that affects the county,” in the prevalence of synthetic opioids.
“As far as the enforceability of the ordinance … we should probably keep the scope of what is being criminalized to actual actions that have impact on the county,” Gripp said.
A small group of people in person and online offered public testimony in support of the local ordinance. Dawn Miles shared mild disappointment that the ordinance could not enact a more serious charge, but she recognized the barriers to doing so.
“I am in support of the ordinance, although I wish we could take it a step further,” Miles said. “Because I do believe that the safety of our children, they should be our utmost top priority, and endangering them with controlled substances in my opinion should be a felony, but we have to start somewhere.”
Keeping Kids Safe President Tracie Jefferson tuned in virtually to testify in favor of the ordinance. Jefferson operates the small nonprofit that has called for more decisive action from the state to address child endangerment with controlled substances and has been a critic of the state's Keeping Families Together Act.
That act, passed in 2021 and taking effect in the summer of 2023, has changed the criteria for removing a child from the care of the parents in hopes of finding better outcomes for children. Critics of the act have argued that it has led to more children that should have been separated from their parents instead being put in danger.
“When our state fails to afford children equal protection under the law, unfortunately that protection then falls to the more local governments,” Jefferson said. “We should not have to wait until a child ingests fentanyl, overdoses or dies before we’re willing to call their circumstances dangerous.”
