Read on Twitter
Now County Counsel is reporting back on options for BOS to remove the Sheriff, an elected official, and discuss how the position could be changed from elected to appointed. https://twitter.com/LADefenders2020/status/1354182506560405505
Option 1: Charter Amendment. CA Constitution allows county charter to remove elected officials and other counties (like San Bernardino County) have valid provisions for its BOS to remove sheriffs. Per Government Code 25303
Proposed county charter amendment would have to be voted on by residents of county with simple majority required for passing.
Option 2: Recall of elected official. County Counsel is now running thru the recall petition procedures.
Option 3: Civil Grand Jury presents accusation against sheriff for willful misconduct in office, delivered to the DA, who serves the accusation to the sheriff, who appears before the court to answer the accusation. If sheriff denies, there would be a jury trial.
Government code does not define willful misconduct. This includes conduct that does not rise to level of crime, but mere negligence is not sufficient.
Option 4: Quo Warranto motion by the Attorney General to remove the official from office.
To change sheriff from elected to appointed position would require amending the Constitution and the County Charter. Amending constitution could be done by initiative process or by legislature. Petition requires approx 997,000 signatures.
Now remarks by the Supervisors.
Solis says there's been multiple attempts to hold sheriff accountable, with "false pretenses" of collaboration, and that there's a long way to go with establishing trust with the sheriff.
Solis says there's been multiple attempts to hold sheriff accountable, with "false pretenses" of collaboration, and that there's a long way to go with establishing trust with the sheriff.
Supervisor Mitchell now explaining the County Counsel report back presents options and that no specific action will be taken today.
Mitchell highlights the AG pattern practice investigation was "alarming to say the least, an embarrassment."
Mitchell highlights the AG pattern practice investigation was "alarming to say the least, an embarrassment."
She says it was very "painful" to read the AG's statements about sheriffs violating the law, and that it "cannot be ignored." She said the absence of police accountability is contributing to violation of civil and human rights. She refers to deputy involved "gangs."
In the absence of good faith collaboration with the Sheriff, they must take action. She met with the Sheriff, who briefed her on "data." "It should not be assumed my perspective of his performance was changed by a single meeting." She doesn't think his attitude changed either.
She wants to make sure the COC and the OIG are supported so they can do their job. She is looking fwd to the AG investigation and would later revisit options for accountability after AG investigation is complete.
This is disappointing.
The pattern and practice investigation will likely take years to complete.
It seems without Mitchell's vote, the BOS is not likely to take action.
The pattern and practice investigation will likely take years to complete.
It seems without Mitchell's vote, the BOS is not likely to take action.
Kuehl emphasizes the urgency of the issue. There's a lot to be concerned about, she says, and it's one of the duties of the elected BOS to look at the conduct of other electeds if and when they cross a line of criminal or inappropriate activity/supervision.
Kuehl again brings up her idea of creating an independent police force for unincorporated areas.
