Stevens County Commissioners Heated Over Veteran Relief Policy

The Stevens County commissioners met on Nov. 7, to discuss the county’s new Veterans Relief Fund (VRF) policy. During the meeting, the commissioners found themselves unable to reach an agreement on approving the new policy and whether it would benefit local veterans.

According to the state legislature, a veterans relief fund policy is a set of guidelines for providing short-term financial assistance to eligible veterans and their families who are experiencing a financial crisis. These policies outline eligibility requirements, the types of expenses that can be covered (such as rent, utilities, and medical or vehicle costs), and the limitations on the amount of aid available. The primary purpose is to offer temporary support to help a veteran regain financial stability, not to provide long-term or automatic entitlements.

The commissioners had previously met on Oct. 29, and Nov. 6, to review the new policy draft. Stevens County auditor Lori Larsen has also had a role in drafting the new policy. During the meeting she stated that she removed references to Stevens County Veteran Service Office, made changes to the policy’s formatting, and eliminated sections that called for coordination between Veteran Service Office and other agencies. The commissioners also emphasized the need for consistency, specifically in terms of how veterans receive funding, indicating that some veterans in the past have been treated as more important than others.

Elizabeth Snell with the Veteran Advisory Board gave a statement to the commissioners regarding how veterans will be impacted by changes to the VRF. Snell said she believes that the policy should offer an alternative decider because the auditor’s office may have a conflict of interest when deciding funding. Snell then stated concerns over the length of time it could take for veterans to provide proof of income, saying it could take up to six months. She also shared concerns over privacy, stating that confidential health information could become easily accessible through the VRF application. 

Veteran Donna Meyer, who is also involved with American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars, spoke to the commissioners and recommended that a clause be added around how big the VRF balance could get and when excess money would be returned to taxpayers. Meyer said she felt dismissed after bringing up her concerns; attendee Nancy Cross said commissioner Young indicated that Meyer’s concerns “didn’t need to be addressed.” 

Meyer said, “The RCW (Revised Code of Washington) states that some of that money needs to be returned to the taxpayers and the RCW unfortunately doesn't direct how to return it or at what percentage of the VRF.” She added, “[The commissioners] didn't want our input at this point and Lori (Larsen) never really wanted our input.”

Steven Cross, a veteran and member of the Veteran Advisory Board, said, “The fact that [the county commissioners] didn't trust members of the Veterans Advisory Board to help veterans with this policy and funds, that kind of rubbed me wrong.”

Meyer, Steven Cross and Nancy Cross all stated that they were given less than 15 minutes before the meeting to review the new VRF policy, and that the commissioners did not review the document in its entirety before voting on its approval. 

After public comments were given, commissioner Greg Young motioned to approve the VRF policy with the changes proposed by Larson. Commissioner Mark Burrows opposed the motion, stating that he thought they would review the VRF “line by line with the Veteran Advisory Board.” He said that the policy felt rushed and advised that the commissioners take their time to approve the new policy, especially considering that “the current system still works.”

Burrows said, “A veteran that needs wood pellets, firewood, heating oil, or food can still apply for it and get it.” He added that he was “opposed to adopting this policy without fully vetting out every line of it and having input from people who actually do the work.”

Commissioner Monty Stobart entered the conversation and said he felt the new policy is “a step in the right direction” because the current policy has loopholes that could put the county at liability according to their attorney. He said the new policy protects the commissioners from a potential lawsuit.

Burrows said the new policy is “not as clean as it’s being suggested,” and indicated that a previous action Stobart took “created a fulcrum” for the commissioners to have to pivot on. He then quoted the auditor as saying that there have been zero refusals to pay claims under $750 under the last several years and implied that Stobart wants to rush through approving the new policy because of a “questionable circumstance he (Stobart) highlighted with an anonymous veteran.” Burrows then referenced a letter Stobart had written that had “thrown the Veteran Advisory Board chairman under the bus and insinuated that he was participating in fraud or gifting,” expressing discontentment that the letter was written as though Stobart were speaking for all of the commissioners. Burrows claimed that Stobart “threw the program under the bus.”

Shortly after, the discussion ended and the commissioners approved the new policy with a 2-1 vote, Burrows opposing. 

Nancy Cross said, “It just felt sneaky to push [the policy] through without listening to public concern.” 

Steven Cross said he announced his resignation from the Veterans Advisory Board upon hearing the decision to approve the VRF policy. He has since retracted his resignation and is waiting to hear from the county commissioners if he will be reinstated. 

After the vote, Stobart made to leave the room, despite attendees still asking for clarification on their decision and the future of the VRF policy. According to Nancy Cross, Tom Hicks, who is a Veteran Service officer and attended the meeting, had his hand raised and was asking the commissioners to review the policy again. As Stobart walked by him, he “swatted” Hicks’ hand down. Both Nancy Cross and Meyer watched the altercation and said that Hicks responded by telling Stobart not to hit him. Stobart said he was not trying to hit Hicks, he was trying to grab him, to which Hicks told Stobart not to touch him. “It was completely unexpected and wildly unprofessional,” Nancy Cross said. 

Meyer said, “Everybody said they're kind of stunned to see a commissioner actually touch a member of the audience in anger.” She added, “You just kind of feel like you're in the Twilight Zone at that point.”

After the exchange, Stobart left despite community members asking the commissioners for clarification on their decision. Meyer said multiple people who witnessed the altercation with Stobart encouraged Hicks to report it to law enforcement. 

The county commissioner meetings on Monday, Nov. 10, were cancelled due to “no quorum available;” it was noted on the agenda that Stobart was “out of office.” Stobart did not respond to request for comment.

According to the state legislature, a veterans relief fund policy is a set of guidelines for providing short-term financial assistance to eligible veterans and their families who are experiencing a financial crisis. These policies outline eligibility requirements, the types of expenses that can be covered (such as rent, utilities, and medical or vehicle costs), and the limitations on the amount of aid available. The primary purpose is to offer temporary support to help a veteran regain financial stability, not to provide long-term or automatic entitlements.

The commissioners had previously met on Oct. 29, and Nov. 6, to review the new policy draft. Stevens County auditor Lori Larsen has also had a role in drafting the new policy. During the meeting she stated that she removed references to Stevens County Veteran Service Office, made changes to the policy’s formatting, and eliminated sections that called for coordination between Veteran Service Office and other agencies. The commissioners also emphasized the need for consistency, specifically in terms of how veterans receive funding, indicating that some veterans in the past have been treated as more important than others.

Elizabeth Snell with the Veteran Advisory Board gave a statement to the commissioners regarding how veterans will be impacted by changes to the VRF. Snell said she believes that the policy should offer an alternative decider because the auditor’s office may have a conflict of interest when deciding funding. Snell then stated concerns over the length of time it could take for veterans to provide proof of income, saying it could take up to six months. She also shared concerns over privacy, stating that confidential health information could become easily accessible through the VRF application.

Veteran Donna Meyer, who is also involved with American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars, spoke to the commissioners and recommended that a clause be added around how big the VRF balance could get and when excess money would be returned to taxpayers. Meyer said she felt dismissed after bringing up her concerns; attendee Nancy Cross said commissioner Young indicated that Meyer’s concerns “didn’t need to be addressed.”

Meyer said, “The RCW (Revised Code of Washington) states that some of that money needs to be returned to the taxpayers and the RCW unfortunately doesn't direct how to return it or at what percentage of the VRF.” She added, “[The commissioners] didn't want our input at this point and Lori (Larsen) never really wanted our input.”

Steven Cross, a veteran and member of the Veteran Advisory Board, said, “The fact that [the county commissioners] didn't trust members of the Veterans Advisory Board to help veterans with this policy and funds, that kind of rubbed me wrong.”

Meyer, Steven Cross and Nancy Cross all stated that they were given less than 15 minutes before the meeting to review the new VRF policy, and that the commissioners did not review the document in its entirety before voting on its approval.

After public comments were given, commissioner Greg Young motioned to approve the VRF policy with the changes proposed by Larson. Commissioner Mark Burrows opposed the motion, stating that he thought they would review the VRF “line by line with the Veteran Advisory Board.” He said that the policy felt rushed and advised that the commissioners take their time to approve the new policy, especially considering that “the current system still works.”

Burrows said, “A veteran that needs wood pellets, firewood, heating oil, or food can still apply for it and get it.” He added that he was “opposed to adopting this policy without fully vetting out every line of it and having input from people who actually do the work.”

Commissioner Monty Stobart entered the conversation and said he felt the new policy is “a step in the right direction” because the current policy has loopholes that could put the county at liability according to their attorney. He said the new policy protects the commissioners from a potential lawsuit.

Burrows said the new policy is “not as clean as it’s being suggested,” and indicated that a previous action Stobart took “created a fulcrum” for the commissioners to have to pivot on. He then quoted the auditor as saying that there have been zero refusals to pay claims under $750 under the last several years and implied that Stobart wants to rush through approving the new policy because of a “questionable circumstance he (Stobart) highlighted with an anonymous veteran.” Burrows then referenced a letter Stobart had written that had “thrown the Veteran Advisory Board chairman under the bus and insinuated that he was participating in fraud or gifting,” expressing discontentment that the letter was written as though Stobart were speaking for all of the commissioners. Burrows claimed that Stobart “threw the program under the bus.”

Shortly after, the discussion ended and the commissioners approved the new policy with a 2-1 vote, Burrows opposing.

Nancy Cross said, “It just felt sneaky to push [the policy] through without listening to public concern.”

Steven Cross said he announced his resignation from the Veterans Advisory Board upon hearing the decision to approve the VRF policy. He has since retracted his resignation and is waiting to hear from the county commissioners if he will be reinstated.

After the vote, Stobart made to leave the room, despite attendees still asking for clarification on their decision and the future of the VRF policy. According to Nancy Cross, Tom Hicks, who is a Veteran Service officer and attended the meeting, had his hand raised and was asking the commissioners to review the policy again. As Stobart walked by him, he “swatted” Hicks’ hand down. Both Nancy Cross and Meyer watched the altercation and said that Hicks responded by telling Stobart not to hit him. Stobart said he was not trying to hit Hicks, he was trying to grab him, to which Hicks told Stobart not to touch him. “It was completely unexpected and wildly unprofessional,” Nancy Cross said.

Meyer said, “Everybody said they're kind of stunned to see a commissioner actually touch a member of the audience in anger.” She added, “You just kind of feel like you're in the Twilight Zone at that point.”

After the exchange, Stobart left despite community members asking the commissioners for clarification on their decision. Meyer said multiple people who witnessed the altercation with Stobart encouraged Hicks to report it to law enforcement.

The county commissioner meetings on Monday, Nov. 10, were cancelled due to “no quorum available;” it was noted on the agenda that Stobart was “out of office.” Stobart did not respond to request for comment.