Sonoma County allocates $827,000 to set up law enforcement watchdog office

Sonoma County supervisors voted Tuesday to begin recruiting an attorney with the skills and drive to launch a law enforcement watchdog office for the county, approving more than $800,000 over 1½ years for the program.

But the precise scope of the proposed civilian review body was still out of focus, despite an hourslong discussion, the second for the board in three weeks. It remains unclear which agencies, aside from the Sheriff’s Office, the program would review. The office is also without an official name.

The future director’s first goal, among a long list of other county objectives for the office, will be a sharpened focus on how the county can foster better police-community relations and provide insight into police practices and personnel investigations.

“If you don’t get this right from the get-go, you’re going to lose the public confidence. That’s why we shouldn’t spare the expense of finding the right person,” Supervisor Shirlee Zane said.

The board told staff to engage a national association of oversight agencies to tap the group’s network and find a recruiter with expertise in the field to start a broad search for candidates.

After some board debate, supervisors settled on an interim name for the agency - the Independent Office of Law Enforcement Review and Outreach, a mouthful that nevertheless was viewed as an improvement over previous proposals. Prior suggestions included the word “auditor” and “oversight,” which is inaccurate because the office will not have any management or supervisory powers over Sheriff’s Office personnel because that department is run by an elected official.

Supervisor David Rabbitt questioned the viability of a program that only deals with the Sheriff’s Office and not other law enforcement agencies countywide.

Sheriff’s internal investigators fielded 62 citizen-initiated complaints and five administrative reviews of incidents, such as jail deaths and officer-?involved shootings, in 2014. That’s about one citizen complaint every five days and one administrative review every 10 weeks.

Rabbitt noted that the Sheriff’s Office serves mostly rural areas outside city boundaries - home to about 154,000 residents, or less than one-third of the county’s population. He questioned whether the director of such a watchdog office would have enough work to justify the budget and scope.

“What is that individual going to be doing for 40 hours a week?” Rabbitt said.

As currently planned, the law enforcement review office would not field any complaints regarding six police departments in the county, nor would it handle matters involving local CHP officers, unless city and agency leaders opt to join the program.

It’s unclear if the office would review incidents and practices involving county probation officers because the Sonoma County Superior Court, a state entity, has a role in appointing the county’

It would play a role in reviewing investigations involving jail personnel, a role that didn’t come up in the discussion Tuesday but that Assistant Sheriff Randall Walker confirmed in an interview outside the supervisors’ chambers.

Last year, 16,126 people were booked into the jail after being arrested by six police departments and the CHP in addition to probation officers and sheriff’s deputies.

The board and county staff also were confused about whether the program will involve the Windsor and Sonoma police departments, two cities that contract with the Sheriff’s Office to provide law enforcement services. Assistant Sheriff Rob Giordano told the board that because the Sheriff’s Office handles all disciplinary matters for those personnel, they also would be under the purview of the civilian review program.

Sheriff Steve Freitas reiterated his support for the concept of a watchdog agency that reviews internal investigations, provided that person be an attorney who can lawfully review internal documents that contain confidential personnel information protected by state laws and not for public release.

“The auditor concept, I’ve been supportive of that from the beginning,” Freitas said.

Tuesday’s board authorized county staff to begin a recruitment effort aimed at hiring a director to start the job in January. Candidates will be subjected to background investigations. The Sheriff’s Office and members of the disbanded community task force that recommended the independent office also will be allowed to provide input on the candidates.

The nearly $827,000 budget allocated to the office through the end of June 2017 includes funding for a director and administrative aide to run the program, office space and technology costs and support for citizen and youth advisory committees. The budget also includes funding for the Sheriff’s Office to add a lieutenant and administrative assistant to participate in community outreach efforts and develop and provide the data and documents required by the review program.

The board approved pay for the director of the program at $254,402 and $99,186 for the administrative aide.

Tuesday’s step comes about 20 months after the fatal shooting of 13-year-old Andy Lopez by a deputy, an incident that unveiled a deep distrust of law enforcement in the local Latino community especially and served to revive calls for civilian oversight of law enforcement.

Establishment of a watchdog entity with that mission was the central recommendation made by the Community and Local Law Enforcement Task Force convened three months after Lopez’s death.

Development of the program has moved too slowly according to many members of the panel and activists pressing for reform of law enforcement.

But some union officials representing law enforcement contend the county has moved too fast, saying staff members advancing the proposal have missed key steps in the process, such as engaging the unions representing deputies and correctional officers.

Joe Dulworth, president of the Sonoma County Deputy Sheriff’s Association, said the planned watchdog office could impact deputies’ rights as outlined by state law as well as the association members’ contract with the county.

An attorney representing the Deputy Sheriff’s Association sent a letter to the board Monday demanding that the association be given more advance notice before the board considers making decisions that could affect its members.

The letter noted that the association was given more than 150 pages outlining the proposal on the Friday afternoon before the board’s Tuesday meeting, which does not provide enough time for the group to review a program that could potentially violate deputies’ rights.

“We support the process, we just want it to be done right the first time,” Dulworth said.

You can reach Staff Writer Julie Johnson at 521-5220 or julie.johnson@pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter @jjpressdem.