Letter: Questions about sheriff’s decision

Sheriff Atkins is obviously dealing with daunting challenges. Still, one questions the wisdom of posting specific criteria in which deputies will not respond. By doing so, he has given criminals a no-response zone in which they can commit crimes without intervention. Instead, the sheriff could have stated that the department, due to extreme staffing shortages, has to prioritize its responses to all calls.

Just a few more questions …

How many misdemeanor thefts, of property less than $750 in value, can a person commit before the department responds?

What is the sheriff’s definition of a minor assault?

What should be done with lost or found property that doesn’t fit the criteria justifying an officer response?

Aren’t you concerned that by limiting welfare checks that you’re endangering the elderly and disabled?

Will deputies respond to incidents that fall within a no-response category when they are not otherwise occupied?

Barring a crime occurring, aren’t you basically throwing out the enforcement of parking, traffic or responses to neighborhood complaints?

For theft of vehicles, damage and vandalism of property, what is your definition of suspect information? Aren’t you interfering with deputies developing suspect information by not allowing them to respond to these calls and to investigate?