TRAVERSE CITY — Grand Traverse County elected officials unanimously agreed earlier this month to support a cross-deputization agreement that will clear jurisdictional hurdles between the Grand Traverse County Sheriff’s Office and the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians’ Tribal Police force.
The agreement, approved during the Aug. 6 regular meeting, allows sheriff’s deputies and tribal officers to make arrests of both native and non-native Americans on tribal lands and throughout other areas across the county.
Grand Traverse County Sheriff Michael D. Shea explained that similar agreements are already in place in surrounding areas — Antrim, Benzie and Leelanau counties — and have been successful, making Grand Traverse the newest county in northern Michigan to adopt an agreement.
“The question comes up, ‘Well, why?’” Shea said to the board during the meeting. “To put it in simplified terms, because it’s a partnership and … their presence within our county on trust land creates jurisdictional issues that we have no lawful jurisdiction on.”
The sheriff said, realistically, county deputies are the first to arrive on a scene after a crime has been reported, but have run into jurisdictional issues in the past.
“We have no lawful jurisdiction there,” Shea said. “We’ve had officers who have been assaulted, and absolutely nothing comes out of it because we aren’t lawfully there. This is long overdue. I see this as an absolute no-brainer.”
Shea was joined by Tribal Police Capt. David Crockett and the tribe’s general counsel John Petoskey, indicating both entities were supportive of the measure.
“This agreement has been in existence with Leelanau, Antrim and Benzie counties for a number of years,” Petoskey told commissioners. “It has gone through the vetting process with the state and also with the United States.”
Petoskey explained that the design of the agreement allows officers to act as either a county or tribal deputy, which bypasses the jurisdictional questions relating to the offender, the victim and the location of the alleged crime.
“It’s worked very well in Leelanau County and it’s worked very well in Benzie County,” Petoskey said. “The big point is that this solves the jurisdictional questions for the police on the ground in providing effective law enforcement for the whole community.”
Grand Traverse County Administrator Nate Alger offered comments of support, stating that the agreement received a thorough vetting process through the county’s civil counsel firm — Cohl, Stoker and Toskey — located in Lansing.
The vetting process was stalled once the agreement was sent to the Michigan Municipal Risk Management Authority.
“We said ‘listen, these are in place already in Leelanau County … what’s the difference?” Alger explained to commissioners about the delay. “The answer I got was ‘because we asked.’”
Alger later explained that to ensure that the agreement met all legal requirements before implementation, multiple reviews were conducted.
“These types of agreements require several layers of review and often go through revisions followed by secondary reviews,” Alger said in an email to the Record-Eagle. “This was not the result of any intentional delay; it was simply a thorough process that was challenging.”
Furthermore, the agreement comes at no cost to either the county sheriff’s office or the tribe.
“No additional officers are expected to be added to the GTSO as a result of this agreement,” Alger said. “Deputies already respond to calls in Indian Country, and this agreement formalizes the framework to ensure both the GT Band and Grand Traverse County are legally protected in those interactions.”
Shea remarked to county officials that, while he did not need their explicit approval, the board’s support would be a positive as the agreement takes effect. District 5 Commissioner Rob Hentschel made the motion to approve the agreement with District 6 Commissioner Darryl Nelson’s second.
“I greatly appreciate this is something we’ve talked about for many, many years,” Hentschel said. “Collaboration is the ultimate currency, really, and when we work together, we get so much more done.”
District 3 Commissioner Ashlea Walter questioned if the public had knowledge and understanding of the agreement and how it would work moving forward. Board chair and District 8 Commissioner Scott Sieffert echoed that inquiry, stating that while the laws remain the same, “the people knocking on the doors enforcing them might be a little different if you go from one spot where you have no authority and now you have full authority.”
“Maybe a little education is necessary to prevent people from being hurt, particularly your staff,” Sieffert said.
Shea spoke to those concerns, acknowledging that residents aren’t being exposed to a new set of laws with this agreement. Instead, “it’s a matter of enforcement and us having the lawful authority to be present and take action to make the scene safe and protect public safety,” he said.
“As far as the citizens’ educational piece, nothing really changes because the law is the law,” Shea said.