Sheriff Sandra Hutchens has asked that all Professional Service Responders turn in their badges while she reviews the volunteer program. As a result of her request, Lieutenant Thomas Slayton, who supervises the program, sent the following letter to all PSRs praising their service and explaining why their badges should be turned in:

As you may have already heard, there are some changes being made to the PSR program. Our new Sheriff, Sandra Hutchens, is very aware of the valuable service you provide to the people of Orange County. However, she would not be doing her job if she didn’t evaluate all aspects of this department with a fresh set of eyes. We recently met with the new Sheriff in order to discuss the ongoing issue of badges, and it was determined that, in light of the recent California Attorney General opinion on the subject, it would be prudent to collect all badges issued to PSRs. Although I understand that some of you may find this frustrating, I believe that it was the right thing to do and I’ll explain why. 

2007 was a banner year for the PSR program. Collectively, you donated over 16,000 hours to the Orange County Sheriff’s Department, and to the people of Orange County. Some examples of your service include: 

·         Daily traveler assistance at John Wayne Airport. In this assignment, you have helped countless harried travelers navigate the terminal, and served as the Sheriff’s Department’s “eyes and ears” for dangerous and illegal activity.

·         Robotic construction and programming for the Hazardous Devices Squad (Bomb Squad).

·         Flying air missions for the department, using your own aircraft to do so.

·         Acting as a mobile “Citizen Patrol” for some of our contract cities. In this role, you have helped to suppress property crimes and juvenile activity. You have done this safely and appropriately by serving as “eyes and ears” for the department, never making contact but reporting what you see.

·         Volunteering as an Emergency Communications Dispatcher

·         Search and Rescue – in this role, you work side-by-side with sworn reserves. Among other things, you respond to search for missing hikers, children, the elderly, and weapons used in the commission of a crime. Often in the middle of the night while the rest of us are sleeping.

·         Performing photography and other high-tech computer services as needed. Most recently, some of you provided free assistance on the Community Services Division’s new blog as well as a complete renovation of the Orange County Training Manager’s Association, including all programming and hosting. 

These are just a small sample of the most recent work for which you are responsible. This program is healthy, vital, and above reproach. Unfortunately, it had a very controversial beginning and has been shrouded in suspicion ever since. Many articles have been written on the program, unfortunately, very few of them have emphasized the good work that is being done every day. To the media (and the public), this program is still viewed in a negative light for one reason, and one reason only: the badges. 

All of you are fully aware that it is against department policy to carry your credentials when not serving as a PSR. Further, you also know that displaying your badge in an effort to gain favor or preferential treatment would only infuriate a peace officer, resulting in additional complications. Unfortunately, realities such as these are completely lost on those who are on the outside, looking in. Regardless of why the badges were originally issued, they are ultimately unnecessary and serve only to drag this fine program down in the eyes of the very people who are benefiting from its services. Therefore, I ask you all not to see this as an indictment of the program, but instead as an opportunity for its redemption. 

Your good work has gone unnoticed all too long and it’s time to divert the attention of the media and the public from that “shiny object” to your valuable service.

When the driver of an Hummer parked illegally in a handicap parking spot threatened Alice Chandler last week, she called 911. Three Deputies responded to the scene. They gave the man a ticket and suggested Chandler call them next time before she confronts a parking violator.

The feisty lady, five days shy of her 80th birthday, informed the deputies that she had once been a Special Deputy for the Orange County Sheriff's Department and she still had her badge and gun.

"The one deputy gave me look," she said later. "It got me wondering whether I should turn it in."

She went home and wrote a letter to Sheriff Sandra Hutchens. She congratulated Sheriff Hutchens as the first female Sheriff in Orange County. Former Special Deputy Chandler wondered whether she may have been the first female Deputy Sheriff in the Department.

"I am not sure if there was ever another woman deputy at that time, at least I never met or heard of one," she said in her letter.

Department records reviewed so far were unable to determine whether or not she was the Department's first female Deputy.

Although Department records indicate she was Special Deputy, she was given a Deputy Sheriff's badge.

"I was told by Sheriff Musick that I had the full responsiblility of a deputy sheriff and could be called at anytime should they need me and I felt so proud to have my badge and the responsibiity," she said in the letter.

She came to the Division Commanders meeting on Thursday, her 80th birthday, and formally turned her badge, identification card and gun, a .32 caliber long revolver, to Sheriff Hutchens and Captain Davis Nighswonger. She was given a birthday cake and a rendition of "Happy Birthday to You" by all who were present.

To read a Los Angeles Times account of the story click here.   

From the Register's Peggy Lowe:

I cornered Anderson after the meeting this morning and asked him why he wanted to hire Gennaco. He said that along with other changes he’s making, he wants Gennaco to do a review of policies and procedures and make a report back to the Board of Supervisors.

“If you don’t have that, the residents and even the board are going to wonder if we’re being as transparent as we can,” Anderson said.

I also asked Anderson if he wants Gennaco to look at anything specifically, since Anderson has been briefed by both the grand jury and DA Tony Rack on what the panel’s investigation found. Anderson said he can’t coment on specifics, as he’s bound by the grand jury’s secrecy rules, and that he hasn’t seen the entire 8,000-page report.

“I kind of had the high flyover, where you see the peaks and the snow caps,” he said of what he was told of the probe. “But I certainly don’t know what’s in the valleys and the foothills.”

On acting on some of what he knows, Anderson admitted, “It’s a weird dance I have to dance right now.”

But clearly, he’s dancing up a storm, firing two top aides, restructing his command staff, announcing changes in jail procedures, and hiring a favorite of Supe John Moorlach to do an independent review.

Anderson said he hopes Gennaco can start next week and anticipates that his report might take a few months to complete.

Here's a post from yesterday by our resident blogger, John, on the Office of Independent Review:

An Office of Independent Review similar to the one being set up for the Orange County Sheriff’s Department has been in operation since 2001 in Los Angeles under the direction of former federal civil rights prosecutor Michael Gennaco.

In that time the office has reviewed about 1,500 cases involving the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and, virtually every case that has been investigated by the LASD’s Internal Affairs Bureau. Gennaco’s team has now entered its third three-year contract cycle providing oversight for LASD cases.

...More here

An Office of Independent Review similar to the one being set up for the Orange County Sheriff’s Department has been in operation since 2001 in Los Angeles under the direction of former federal civil rights prosecutor Michael Gennaco.

In that time the office has reviewed about 1,500 cases involving the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and, virtually every case that has been investigated by the LASD’s Internal Affairs Bureau. Gennaco’s team has now entered its third three-year contract cycle providing oversight for LASD cases.

“As we have stated repeatedly, our role is not to ensure that management will “win” or that the system will “get” deputies in cases involving alleged misconduct. Instead, we promote the fairness and thoroughness and consistency of the process — principles that most deputies would seemingly find acceptable and desirable,” the OIR annual statement reads.

One of the findings that OIR has made in the years they have reviewed deputy conduct in Los Angeles is that discipline can be different for deputies working in different areas of the city. Area Commanders can impose up to 20 days suspension for deputies under their command and OIR has strived to see that similar offenses receive similar discipline, said Gennaco.

In Orange County, the suspension of a deputy must be approved by the Assistant Sheriff commanding the deputy’s unit. An Area Commander in the LASD is two levels below an Assistant Sheriff.

The OIR also reviews a case to determine whether it has been fully investigated.

“Our review has led  to the discovery of exculpatory evidence or extenuating circumstances that have exonerated the deputy or resulted in a lesser level of discipline,” Gennaco said. “Our goal is to see that the decision makers are acting on the best information available.  We want the department to get it right.” More...

Peggy Lowe writes:

"Moorlach’s initial plan was a civilian review panel, but has since been changed to model a Los Angeles County agency called the Office of Independent Review.  It will be comprised of civil rights attorneys who monitor and advise the sheriff’s Internal Affairs Unit."

Acting Sheriff Jack Anderson addressed the Board of Supervisors on this issue February 5. Here's the video:

New opportunities and challenges demand that we constantly reevaluate our operation. Whether we implement new programs and services, collaborate with fellow law enforcement agencies, or work with outside organizations to utilize the best technology and resources, our focus must always be on our mission and whether the changes we implement will help us in exceeding expectations in our service to the community.

Throughout the history of the Orange County Sheriff’s Department we have been steadfast in our mission: To provide professional, responsive and caring law enforcement services to the residents, businesses and visitors of Orange County. Our unwavering focus on this mission has created one of the safest places to live, work and play, and those we serve continue to be satisfied and confident in our work.

Of course, we don’t rest on our laurels. Our ability to be responsive, creative and innovative to the changing needs of the community is essential. We continue to make tremendous strides, joining LiNX, a regional information sharing system; supporting the Office of Independent Review, growing our Cross-Designation program and addressing the operational strain of our growing jails.

Many challenges and opportunities are ahead, but the community we serve can rest assured that the men and women of the Orange County Sheriff’s Department remain committed to our role and flexible in our approach.

Thank you for all you do for the residents, businesses and visitors we serve each and every day.

On Tuesday, I addressed the Board of Supervisors to voice my support for the establishment of the Office of Independent Review. This oversight mechanism has evolved over many months and required the time and attention of several members of our staff as well as staff from the Board. What was once a hastily developed form of “civilian review” that not even other members of the Board of Supervisors could support has now become a workable, responsible model similar to the Office of Independent Review in Los Angeles.

Transparency is essential to our operation, as it provides members of the media, the public, and government officials an unobstructed view “inside” our jails, patrol cars and investigations. The International Association of Chiefs of Police released a publication in September 2006 entitled, Protecting Civil Rights. In the executive summary they write, “Unlike any other profession, the possibility of violating civil rights, or being perceived as violating civil rights, is inherent in many of the duties officers are required to perform on a daily basis.” We encounter such perceptions every day we open up a newspaper or listen to a public official. Transparency offers our community the opportunity to see so that they may truly believe that 99.9 percent of the men and women in law enforcement are professional, ethical individuals who perform a difficult job every day.

On February 26, the Board of Supervisors will once again read the ordinance establishing an Office of Independent Review. After discussion and public comment they will hold a vote to adopt the ordinance and direct county staff to move forward. The Office of Independent Review is a healthy addition to our transparent operation as this will be one additional tool to showcase your tremendous talent and professionalism in the work you do to keep Orange County safe each and every day.

Click below to view Acting Sheriff Jack Anderson's address to the board:

And here's a link to the Acting Sheriff's letter to the Orange County Register on the Office of Independent Review.

From the Sunday, February 3 edition of the Orange County Register:

The public's confidence in their law enforcement services is an absolute necessity. Every day, members of the Orange County Sheriff's Department interact with tens of thousands of our residents and visitors either on the streets, or in our jails. By and large, these interactions are professional, and the communities we serve consistently voice their confidence and appreciation. But more can be done to ensure that the law enforcement community is adjusting to contemporary cultural shifts and the desire of the public to look inside our operations.

For many years the call for openness and transparency in government and its agents has been voiced from kitchen tables and town halls all the way to our nation's capital. This desire has impacted law enforcement in a positive way. The public not only wants to know what we do each day, but they want to see that we're fulfilling our duties in an ethical and responsible manner.

The Board of Supervisors on Tuesday will consider an ordinance establishing an Office of Independent Review for the Sheriff's Department. We believe the ordinance will move forward with the full support of the board, and we look forward to working with the county to provide an additional resource for oversight and openness for the people we serve.

I have been a longtime advocate of transparency. As an example, in 1992, following the Rodney King incident, as a deputy serving in patrol I was charged with conducting research on the feasibility of installing video cameras in sheriff's patrol cars. After I identified several vendors and oversaw a pilot program, the department installed video cameras in every patrol car.

Today, over 15 years later, every patrol car still carries a camera, and every patrol deputy wears a wireless microphone. The Sheriff's Department is currently upgrading the technology into the digital arena.

Since its inception, the presence of these video cameras led to a large drop in the number of internal-affairs investigations related to patrol operations. With every incident being recorded, the county and the department have saved untold tens of millions of dollars in legal claims because these videos have vindicated our deputies many times over. Patrol video systems also significantly cut down on the criminal courts' trial load as the system provides irrefutable evidence, leading to more defendants concluding it is more advantageous to engage in plea bargaining.

Such transparency also gives us the opportunity to continually evaluate our policies and guidelines, improve our training and, when necessary, take appropriate corrective measures.

The patrol video cameras were initially met with much ambivalence. However, these cameras and the incidents they record have served as both a great tool and an extraordinary defense for the department and the county. We are proud of the men and women of the Sheriff's Department and the quality professional work they do, and we have no hesitation of recording their activities.

Such transparency has been one of our greatest resources, and we must be willing to continue to invest in opportunities for openness, regardless of any temporary apprehension such changes may bring about.

This story relates to our ongoing discussion of law enforcement review here in Orange County.

From the Los Angeles Times, "Policy Violations found in Gibson's arrest":

"The actions amounted to minor infractions of department rules, but they made it look like Gibson received preferential treatment, said Michael Gennaco, chief attorney for the sheriff's Office of Independent Review.

"It certainly creates an image of celebrity justice," he said.

In addition to the Gibson and Hilton cases, the panel reviewed the Sheriff's Department's response to the deaths of jail inmates and a contest meant to encourage arrests by deputies."

Read it all right here.

...in which we continue to repeat ourselves...

On her blog, Peggy Lowe writes:

"Assistant Sheriff Dan Martini told the board that the Office of Independent Review in Los Angeles County, which OC is using as a model, only works because it was established by the sheriff and has a good working relationship with that department. Martini didn’t have to say it, but Carona has opposed this idea, saying it’s not needed with so many other oversight entities in place."

The only problem is that Sheriff Carona NEVER opposed the idea of an Office of Independent Review (OIR).

Sheriff Carona and the Command Staff NEVER opposed the idea of civilian review. We've argued this many times, and we can point, as we have in the past, to the PUBLIC RECORD. The Sheriff has long been a proponent of oversight for all arms of government, including the Board of Supervisors.  Here's the video of the Sheriff's comments to the board when the proposal was first discussed. And here's what the Sheriff said at the beginning of his presentation:

"Let me agree with everything that Supervisor Moorlach said. He and I have had this discussion about oversight within the county long before I was an elected official and when he was trying to become an elected official. It was a lack of oversight that I believed caused the largest municipal bankruptcy this nation has ever seen. So I have been an advocate for oversight for quite awhile."

What the Sheriff was opposed to was Supervisor Moorlach's original ill conceived proposal, which was hatched in secret and designed to take advantage of the media attention surrounding the death of inmate John Chamberlain.

Furthermore, the Sheriff and the Command Staff weren't alone in their opposition to Moorlach's original civilian review plan. The District Attorney, Sheriff's Community Coalition, the Orange County Human Relations Commission and the Orange County Chiefs and Sheriffs Association all opposed the original plan because they all recognized that it was flawed, likely illegal and doomed to failure. Even Steven Greenhut, who never misses an opportunity to attack law enforcement, recognized that the original proposal would. He writes:

"Although civilian oversight is a solid idea, given that the public should have a right to be part of investigations into the actions of government agents with life-and-death power over them, such oversight panels have been severely limited following the California Supreme Court's 2006 Copley decision, which curtailed the release of law-enforcement disciplinary records during administrative hearings.

[...]

As a result, Orange County decided to pursue a model similar to the one successfully used in Los Angeles County."

A few days ago Peggy also wrote:

"But Moorlach's plan was immediately opposed by Sheriff Mike Carona and District Attorney Tony Rackauckas, who argued that there are already several existing checks in place and that a new panel would undermine law enforcement."

This interpretation is a bit closer to the public record of the Sheriff's comments. Yes, it's true, law enforcement oversight exists in many forms, but the heart of the matter is that the Sheriff and the Command Staff and the District Attorney, Sheriff's Community Coalition, the Orange County Human Relations Commission and the Orange County Chiefs and Sheriffs Association all opposed the original plan because it wouldn't have made good public policy. Moorlach failed to bring knowledgeable individuals to the table when drafting his first scheme.

In fact, Supervisor Moorlach believes there is a need for greater transparency in county government, however, based on what was said during the discussion in May, it appears that Supervisor Moorlach's original proposal for law enforcement oversight was created in secret, with little discussion or participation from members of the Board and the law enforcement officials his proposal would effect. Again, the Sheriff discussed this at the hearing in May:

"It's not the fact that I'm opposed to civilian oversight. I believe the proposal that has come forward, as you've already mentioned, was not vetted well through our department. In fact, there was no discussion and I don't believe we have had a chance to weigh in with the District Attorney and Probation to offer significant alternatives. It's an either or scenario," said the Sheriff.

The Sheriff's opposition (as well as all others) was not directed toward law enforcement oversight. This opposition was directed toward Moorlach's original proposal and the way this scheme was hatched. This is a matter of public record.

Additionally, for the record, here is a history of our discussion of law enforcement oversight. We know the register reads this blog so we know they're aware of our position on this matter.

The public record is clear but few members of the public will review the record itself. Most will rely on the media to interpret what took place and will, therefore, be sadly misinformed.

Today, the Board of Supervisors will be hosting a board workshop and public forum on the Office of Independent Review (OIR), the still evolving oversight model. The workshop is scheduled to begin at 1:30.

FACT: The current model for the Office of Independent Review still needs tweaking, but it has come a long way from the original proposal. It is our hope that this Office of Independent Review, if established, will focus and work directly and only with the Orange County Sheriff's Department. While we believe all county government deserves scrutiny and oversight, the OIR model would work most efficiently if focused on the Sheriff's Department alone. Additionally, we hope to include a "community" component, perhaps through the Human Relations Commission to ensure that those we serve have a voice in the process.

FACT: Regardless of what some in the media are writing, the Sheriff has been an advocate for oversight for many years. At the board hearing in May where Supervisor Moorlach unveiled his scheme plan, the Sheriff spoke:

"Let me agree with everything that Supervisor Moorlach said. He and I have had this discussion about oversight within the county long before I was an elected official and when he was trying to become an elected official. It was a lack of oversight that I believed caused the largest municipal bankruptcy this nation has ever seen. So I have been an advocate for oversight for quite awhile."

FACT: Specifically, what the Sheriff and Sheriff's command staff objected to was the tact and the direction Supervisor Moorlach was taking to move his proposal forward. Supervisor Moorlach believes there is a need for greater transparency in county government, however, based on what was said during the discussion in May, it appears that Supervisor Moorlach's original proposal for law enforcement oversight was created in secret, with little discussion or participation from members of the Board and the law enforcement officials his proposal would effect. Again, the Sheriff discussed this at the hearing in May:

"It's not the fact that I'm opposed to civilian oversight. I believe the proposal that has come forward, as you've already mentioned, was not vetted well through our department. In fact, there was no discussion and I don't believe we have had a chance to weigh in with the District Attorney and Probation to offer significant alternatives. It's an either or scenario," said the Sheriff.

FACT: For the record, the FACTS on our operation speak for themselves:

The Orange County Jail system remains one of the safest mega-jails in the country. Based on average daily populations, the Orange County Jail system is now the 2nd largest jail system in California and the 8th largest nationally.  In 2006, the Average Daily Population (ADP) exceeded 6,365 inmates. Our current inmate-to-staff ratio is 34 to 1, significantly higher than the national average of 14 to 1. Orange County is 60% below the national average of inmate-on-staff violence and 45% below the national average of inmate-on-inmate violence.  

FACT: The residents, businesses and visitors have extraordinary confidence in the men and women of the Orange County Sheriff's Department.

FACT: An history of the Civilian Review discussion can be found here.

First off, my apologies to anyone who doesn’t watch Seinfeld reruns, but lately my visits to the Board of Supervisors meetings have taken on an eerie similarity to the “Airing of Grievances,” a tradition which is part of “Festivus,” the made-up holiday made famous in the Seinfeld show. The “Airing of Grievances” is the part of the holiday where you gather people around you and tell them all the ways they’ve disappointed you over the last year. While “Festivus” is supposed to be an annual event, it seems I’ve been celebrating the “Airing of Grievances” over at the board for several months now -- with good reason.

Most frustrating is that there are many positive aspects of our operation that truly deserve as much of our focus and attention. The issues we face with the Board, however, rise to such a level that we must stand up and educate the public about the facts and challenge our government leaders to review their objectives.

Many great things are taking place in our department. Our Cross-Designation program continues to garner national attention as one of the most successful programs in the country. Our Forensic Science Services Division continues to expand the use of technology and increase the number of DNA hits. Our Crime Lab now receives more DNA hits than any other lab in the state. And our fine tradition of training continues in our brand new, state-of-the-art Training Academy. The media has noticed a lot of this, which is great news, because these accomplishments benefit every individual living, working, and playing in Orange County.

Getting out the good news will continue to be a priority, even as the “Airing of Grievances” endures. These issues are far too important to ignore or remain silent about and I’m committed to continuing to stand up to the Board whenever necessary. Your professionalism and dedication, your passion and your expertise, deserve to be recognized and supported at all times – even if it takes resorting to the “Feats of Strength,” which I know the media would enjoy.

I sincerely appreciate all that you do for our residents and businesses and I thank you for your constant and unwavering commitment to keeping Orange County safe.

-end-

For those of you who may be unfamiliar with Festivus, here you go:

At the end of yesterday’s board meeting, Supervisor Moorlach requested the county CEO to “analyze what neighboring counties and cities are doing with regards to having an ethics officer on staff.” The Supervisor also wanted to know what the industry and the public sectors are doing in this regard.  

It appears this request stems from the supervisor’s concern over the unusual leak of confidential information to the Orange County Register. Specifically, the Orange County Register obtained a report unfavorable to Moorlach’s theories on deputy pensions.  

As Peggy Lowe reports:

“Orange County Supervisor John Moorlach's plan to slice the pensions of sheriff's deputies is not likely to win because its key arguments have never been supported by state courts in the past, an independent legal analysis says.

The report, which was sought by other members of the Board of Supervisors and kept from the public, was obtained by The Orange County Register. Moorlach's proposal, aimed at the deputy sheriffs' union, will again be discussed by the board today when it meets in closed session and hires a private legal firm that will pursue a lawsuit.

Written by Richard A. Derevan, a Costa Mesa lawyer, the memo says courts would be reluctant to "unwind" the benefits the deputies already get and that judges could see Moorlach's plan as causing a disruptive domino effect across the state.

Derevan wrote that he has read a September memo written by Morrison & Foerster, the law firm hired by the Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs, in addition to two other reports. In addition to his own concerns, the union ‘has other legal arguments that make the chances of success for the county problematic,’ Derevan wrote.”

Would an Ethics Officer, paid for by county taxpayers, be stationed at the exit of the Hall of Administration to search the pockets and socks of everyone exiting the building to ensure confidential material doesn’t make its way out the door? We aren’t sure. But some individuals believe an ethics officer is not the answer to the problem. Hannah Clark, in Forbes Magazine wrote, “Chief ethics and compliance officers have become trendy in recent years, but some experts fear they act mainly as window dressing.”

Here’s an article from Forbes magazine on the subject.

The Orange County Jail system remains one of the safest mega-jails in the country. Based on average daily populations, the Orange County Jail system is now the 2nd largest jail system in California and the 8th largest nationally.  In 2006, the Average Daily Population (ADP) exceeded 6,365 inmates. Our current inmate-to-staff ratio is 34 to 1, significantly higher than the national average of 14 to 1. Orange County is 60% below the national average of inmate-on-staff violence and 45% below the national average of inmate-on-inmate violence.  

During 2006, eleven inmates died while in custody. Each death is thoroughly investigated and reviewed to find the cause and the manner. In fact, there are a number of entities that can investigate or review an incident including but not limited to the Orange County Grand Jury, the Orange County Board of Supervisors, the Orange County District Attorney, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the California Attorney General’s Office and other law enforcement agencies.

In June, the Orange County Grand Jury released a report on The State of Orange County Jails. Highlighted within the report was a list of statistics showcasing the fact that our jails remain among the largest and the safest across the nation:

• The Orange County Jail System is the 8^th largest jail nationally and the 2^nd largest in California.
• The Orange County Jail System booked approximately 66,000 new arrestees in 2006. 
• The Orange County jails experienced 19 inmate-on-staff-assaults in 2006, or an average of 1.4 per 100 inmates. The national average is about 2.7 per 100 inmates.  
• The Orange County jails experienced 92 inmate-on-inmate assaults in 2006, or an average of 1.4 per 100 inmates. The national average is 10 per 100 inmate 
• The Orange County jails’ average for inmate to total sworn-staff 8.8 to 1. The national average is 4.3 to 1.
• The Orange County jails’ inmate to on-duty staff average is 32 to 1. The national average is approximately 14 to 1.

Back in April, the Register’s Gordon Dillow wrote an article we neglected to showcase: Don’t be conned by jail tales. Here’s an excerpt:

“Yes, people die in Orange County jail. Last year two inmates committed suicide (other attempted suicides were prevented by jail staff) and nine others died of medical causes — not a shockingly high number in a "community" of 6,500 mostly troubled and/or substance-abusing souls. But over the past 10 years Orange County jails have had a far lower rate of "in custody" inmate deaths per capita than the county jails in San Diego, Riverside, San Bernardino and Los Angeles counties.

And yes, people get hurt in Orange County jail. Hey, it's a jail, not a girls' finishing school, with an often brutal inmate social and racial culture. It's not like these guys spend their time holding hands in a circle and singing ‘Give Peace a Chance.’”

With that, in the interest of full disclosure, here’s the breakdown of last year’s in-custody deaths, including cause and manner. This information is available to the press and the public:

INMATE                               CAUSE AND (MANNER) OF DEATH

• BLAJOS, Danny                   Sudden cardiac arrhythmia associated with hypertrophy of the heart           (Natural)

• TOSCAN, Alejandro              Hanging (Suicide)

• Mc CARTHY, Marlan            Hanging (Suicide)

• CHAMBERLAIN, John          Multiple severe blunt impacts   (Homicide)

• HERNANDEZ, Cody            Perforating gunshot wound, torso (Homicide) (Officer involved shooting)

• FARWELL, Wendy               Adenocarcinoma of the ovary with metastases to the brain (Natural)

• LEMIEUX, Marc                   Hypertensive cardiovascular disease (Natural)

• BLAJOS, Rudy                      Hypertensive and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (Natural)

• AVILA, Vicki                        Complications of methamphetamine toxicity (Accident

• MARTINEZ, Abdias              Complications of human immunodeficiency virus infection (Natural)

• REYES, David                       Chronic ethanolism (Natural)

Here's a great article on the challenges of recruiting qualified individuals for a career in law enforcement. Factors such as time and money are noted, as are cost of living and wage/benefit competition with other agencies.

Of course, there are many other factors that can make recruiting much more challenging. Public sentiment and support plays a big role. Possible recruits may think twice if they feel they wouldn’t have the support of local government leaders and the communities they serve.

It's a good thing we don’t have such problems here in Orange County. Well, except for this and this and this.

Here's the entire article, by Nerissa Pacio, Cop Crisis. Here's an excerpt:

"William F. Naber, president of the national public safety training and consulting company Naber Technical Enterprises, conducted a six-month nationwide study of law enforcement agencies’ hiring, recruiting, and retention techniques. He found that police departments have, on average, only 40% to 50% of their sworn officer positions filled.

Naber said the officer shortage is a result of the decrease in the number of applicants combined with the high cost of screening applicants. He said that, on average, 100 applicants are screened to fill one law enforcement position, and that screening takes more than a year, costing agencies between $40,000 to $128,000 per person. During the long screening process, normal attrition occurs because officers are sick or they retire. While trying to find just one suitable candidate, more and more positions go unfilled, forcing more officers to work overtime."

Today, staff from the Board of Supervisors, County Executive Office, County Counsel, Human Resources, the District Attorney’s office, County Probation, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department, and County Internal Audit will meet to provide input “into the optimal provisions of a CLERB.” 

Goals for the meeting include agreement, in substantial part, “on the optimal CLERB oversight structure”; agreement, in substantial part, “on the specific language of a CLERB ordinance should it be implemented”; and “determine additional next steps prior to the September 18, 2007 Board Work Shop.” 

We wish to remind our readers that one excuse for this additional and redundant layer of oversight is to reduce county/taxpayer liabilities and reduce the cost of litigation and claims made against the county.  

The September 18, 2007 Board Workshop will certainly be enlightening. As Peggy Lowe noted on her blog in July, the workshop is set up “to hear from all interested parties.” 

Our understanding was that the September 18th workshop was to be designed to hear from experts on the topic who are familiar with this issue. While everyone should have the opportunity to comment on the topic, comments and opinions are no substitute for research and facts brought forward by subject experts.

One issue we would like to see brought to light today is why, if one goal of the CLERB is to reduce liability, would attorneys with a history of suing the Orange County Sheriff’s Department and the County be included as participants in the September 18th workshop. 

A conflict of interest here is apparent and we hope it will be addressed. 

For further information on CLERB, The OC Sheriff’s blog offers a history.

Here’s Sheriff Carona’s position paper on CLERB.

Here’s the video of the board meeting’s first discussion of CLERB.

And here’s our take from the first board meeting: 

Sheriff and Majority of Supervisors Share Concerns on Proposed Civilian Review Board

SANTA ANA, CA - Supervisor Moorlach's proposed Civilian Law Enforcement Review Board generated many questions and concerns from County Supervisors, Sheriff Carona, the county DA and members of the public.

Sheriff Carona began his statement to the Board by saying , "Let me agree with everything that Supervisor Moorlach said. He and I have had this discussion about oversight within the county long before I was an elected official and when he was trying to become an elected official. It was a lack of oversight that I believed caused the largest municipal bankruptcy this nation has ever seen. So I have been an advocate for oversight for quite awhile."

Concerns were quickly raised, however, as District Attorney Tony Rackauckas began his statement to the Board by letting them know that Moorlach's proposal may not have been completely vetted.

Supervisor Moorlach believes there is a need for greater transparency in county government, however, based on what was said during the discussion, it appears that his proposal for law enforcement oversight was created in secret, with little discussion or participation from members of the Board and the law enforcement officials his proposal would effect.

Supervisor Campbell, when questioning the Sheriff, asked whether the Board should continue discussions with the Sheriff's Department about a civilian oversight board or whether the Sheriff's position was "no civilian oversight, no where, no time, no place."

"It's not the fact that I'm opposed to civilian oversight. I believe the proposal that has come forward, as you've already mentioned, was not vetted well through our department. In fact, there was no discussion and I don't believe we have had a chance to weigh in with the District Attorney and Probation to offer significant alternatives. It's an either or scenario," said the Sheriff.

Supervisor Bates had similar concerns. "It is not going to be effective unless the people who are really in charge (Sheriff, DA, Probation) are part of the process. We need to hear from the people and we certainly need to hear from our law enforcement community how we might institute a grievance procedure that really has teeth because a lot of this can be symbolic." She finished by saying, "I think the ordinance needs more cooking."

The Board voted, in the end, to open discussions between the county, department heads and representatives of labor organizations on what a civilian oversight board would look like and what role it would play, if one was ever authorized in the county.

"Based on what I heard yesterday, the proposal Supervisor Moorlach offered would have fallen flat, had he asked the Board to authorize it at the hearing," said Sheriff Carona.    

In June the Sheriff was a guest on Inside OC with Rick Reiff.  KOCE recently re-aired the program. The Sheriff discussed many of the hot button issues concerning the Department including