Kootenai County Commissioner Bruce Mattare is no longer just a political figure operating behind the scenes.

In 2026, he sits at the center of multiple ongoing concerns involving:

• His unique special deputy status under Sheriff Bob Norris

• His authority over the county budget

• His history as Norris’ campaign manager

• His documented involvement in campaign messaging and PAC activity

• And most recently, his push to introduce elements of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s model — specifically materials tied to the Leroy Baca era — into discussions about the Kootenai County Sheriff’s Office (KCSO)

The pattern is no longer incidental. It is structural.

Who Is Bruce Mattare in Kootenai County Politics?

Bruce Mattare arrived in Kootenai County from Washington D.C. and entered the local political scene as campaign manager for Bob Norris during Norris’ 2019 run for Sheriff.

After Norris was elected, Mattare was sworn in as a special deputy adviser — a status that remains unique among elected officials in the county.

According to the Coeur d’Alene Press (November 18, 2023):

• Mattare is the only elected official holding special deputy status.

• Special deputies sign nondisclosure agreements.

• Mattare has stated he cannot discuss the details of his role.

• Sheriff Norris has confirmed Mattare advises on messaging and public communications.

At the same time, Mattare serves as County Commissioner — one of the three officials responsible for approving and allocating the sheriff’s office budget.

That dual alignment has raised ongoing conflict-of-interest concerns among residents and local officials.

The Special Deputy Conflict Question

The issue is not about whether Mattare is “actively doing something wrong.”

The issue is structural:

• A County Commissioner controls funding.

• A special deputy advises the Sheriff.

• The same individual holds both roles.

In the February 17, 2026 commissioner meeting, when asked directly about what special deputy status entails, Mattare has declined to define its scope, instead reframing questions as adversarial or politically motivated.

In public exchanges, observers have noted recurring tactics including:

• Counter-questioning instead of answering

• Reframing oversight as hostility

• Demanding gratitude instead of providing documentation

• Historical deflection

• Narrative control

These responses have only amplified concerns about transparency.

The $1 Million+ Hayden Law Enforcement Contract Dispute

In 2023, the City of Hayden’s law enforcement contract with the Kootenai County Sheriff’s Office increased to more than $1 million.

That substantial increase prompted Hayden City Councilman Matt Roetter to ask what most taxpayers would consider a straightforward question:

How is overtime calculated, and how are coverage minutes verified? (watch the 2/17/26 commissioner meeting here)

Specifically, Roetter requested documentation showing:

• Overtime billing

• Deputy coverage minutes

• District allocation tracking

• Verification that Hayden was being billed accurately for the services provided

When asked directly how billing hours were calculated, Sheriff Bob Norris did not provide documentation or a technical explanation.

Instead, the exchange shifted.

County Commissioner Bruce Mattare inserted himself into the response after the Sheriff also evaded the question. Rather than provide data, Mattare reframed the issue — suggesting Hayden was receiving a “premier law enforcement” service and implying the city was already getting a good deal.

The tone suggested something deeper:

Why are you even asking for proof?

But the concern was never about whether deputies were doing a good job. It was about documentation.

Even more striking was Mattare’s assertion that he has been “working vigorously” with Motorola — the software and hardware provider — to try to generate the very reports Hayden is requesting.

This raises new structural questions:

• Why is a County Commissioner acting operationally on behalf of the Sheriff’s Office?

• Why would KCSO, equipped with modern Motorola software, ALPR systems, and digital tracking tools, be unable to already generate overtime and allocation reports?

• If reporting limitations exist, why were contracts structured without verified tracking capability?

• And if the technology exists — as most law enforcement platforms are designed to track officer deployment — why is the solution dependent on a commissioner personally “working with” the vendor?

It is not typical for a budget-approving commissioner to function as a de facto operational intermediary between a sheriff’s office and its software contractor.

The core question remains simple:

How are billing hours verified before public funds are invoiced?

To date, that question has not been answered with publicly released documentation.

The LA County “ABC’s of Law Enforcement” Proposal

In a recent 2026 commissioner meeting, Bruce Mattare referenced bringing elements of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department model — including what he described as the “ABC’s of law enforcement” handbook — into discussions about KCSO practices.

This is significant for several reasons:

1. Sheriff Bob Norris served 30 years with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.
2. LASD under former Sheriff Leroy Baca became nationally known for corruption scandals, jail abuse investigations, and federal indictments.
3. The Baca administration has been widely documented for operational and ethical failures.

Leroy Baca himself was later convicted in federal court for obstruction of justice related to attempts to interfere with an FBI investigation.

Given that background, the suggestion that Kootenai County should model elements of LASD policy raises new concerns.

Residents are asking:

Why import policy models from one of the most controversial law enforcement administrations in modern American history?

And why is a County Commissioner — not the Sheriff — promoting external policing frameworks?

Political Influence and PAC Activity

Bruce Mattare’s political footprint extends beyond commissioner votes.

Documented reporting shows:

• He served as campaign manager for Bob Norris.

• He was sworn in as a special deputy after Norris took office.

• His name appears in coordination communications related to political advertising.

• His wife, Carla Mattare, was connected to administrative control of FOP-related social media pages.

• Political action committees connected to deputy associations supported Norris’ campaign.

Under Idaho campaign law, PAC coordination with candidates is prohibited.

Public documentation shows Bruce Mattare approved final language for campaign advertising connected to law enforcement PAC efforts.

Those events continue to raise legal and ethical questions.

Pattern of Power Consolidation

The larger issue is not one contract.

It is a pattern of consolidation:

• Campaign management

• Messaging advisory role

• Special deputy designation

• Budget authority

• Public confrontation of political opponents

• Alignment with law enforcement unions and PACs

• Promotion of external policing frameworks

Each element individually may appear defensible.

Taken together, they represent a tight network of political and financial influence within Kootenai County.

Why This Matters in 2026

Bruce Mattare controls a vote on county funding.

The Sheriff’s Office is the largest line item in the county budget.

When the same individual:

• Advises the Sheriff

• Controls budget allocation

• Participates in political messaging

• Promotes specific law enforcement models

• And deflects documentation requests

It is no longer about personality.

It is about governance structure.

Key Questions Moving Forward

1. What precisely does special deputy status grant?
2. Why does an elected commissioner maintain that designation?
3. Why reference Los Angeles County models tied to the Baca era?
4. How are overtime and billing minutes calculated for Hayden?
5. What safeguards prevent political coordination between county officials and PACs?
6. Does Kootenai County benefit from this concentration of influence?

Liberty Without Compromise Position

This publication is not asking for personalities.

It is asking for documentation.

Public funds require public transparency.

Public authority requires public accountability.

And when those in power routinely answer questions with counter-questions, voters have a right to take notice.