Los Angeles County’s supervisors heard a report Tuesday, Jan. 26, on four possible legal strategies for removing Sheriff Alex Villaneuva from his elected post. But it was not clear, however, if the board would pursue any of them.
The report was requested last year amid tension with the county’s top law officer over what leaders called an “alarming” lack of transparency in his department.
No action was taken on the report, but it foreshadowed a potential showdown — either at the ballot box or in court — if the five-member board truly decides it has had enough of what officials say is a pattern of alleged abuses in the department.
The report comes on the heels of the state Department of Justice decision to launch a civil rights investigation into “credible reports” of deputy misconduct, excessive force, retaliation and mismanagement, announced by Attorney General Xavier Becerra last week.
“I welcome this investigation as a continuation of the board’s continued effort to hold the department accountable for its actions and inactions against the residents of L.A. County,” Board chair Solis said, referring to the AG’s announcement.
Even before Becerra’s announcement, the sheriff had been under legal pressure to provide more information to county agencies he has previously dismissed as tools of the board.
After being threatened with a contempt order, he appeared before the Civilian Oversight Commission last week to update the group on COVID-19 in the jails. Despite the COC’s earlier call for Villanueva to resign and the sheriff’s acrimonious comments about the commission, that discussion was cordial.
Back in October, then-Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas and Sheila Kuehl asked for a report detailing how an elected sheriff could be removed.
They got their answer on Tuesday, from L.A. County Counsel Rodrigo A. Castro-Silva .
Options for removal include:
- The county’s charter could be amended to allow for removal;
- The sheriff could be recalled by citizens;
- A civil grand jury could present an “accusation” against the sheriff for “willful or corrupt misconduct in office,” which would include a jury trial; if convicted, the sheriff would be removed from office; and
- The attorney general could file an action in court challenging the sheriff’s right to hold the office.
Under Article XI of the California Constitution, “the Legislature shall provide for county powers, an elected county sheriff, an elected district attorney, an elected assessor, and an elected governing body in each county.”
Castro-Silva said under the state’s Constitution, a county’s charter could provide for the removal of an elected sheriff and other elected officers. And under an opinion issued 19 years ago by former state Attorney General Bill Lockyer, a charter can give the board the power to remove the sheriff by a four-fifths vote, if proper cause can be demonstrated.
Officials pointed to San Bernardino’s County’s charter, which has such a provision and ordinance that defines “for cause.”
Amending the charter then would be a “viable option,” Castro-Silva said.
But a charter amendment would need to be approved by the voters.
A recall, too, would have to make its way to the ballot — a process that would include required a number of signatures and certification by the Registrar of Voters.
If the sheriff’s office was to go from elected to appointed, it would be a bureaucratic climb, the report detailed.
The state’s Constitution and the county’s charter would have to be amended. Amending the state’s guiding document would need to be approved by a majority of voters. And getting in front of voters would would have to go through a two-thirds vote in the state Legislature or through the initiative process.
Villanueva on Tuesday did not speak specifically to the removal process, but said he’s trying to preserve a “delicate balance between public demands for transparency and the need to protect the integrity of investigations that are often in their infancy.”
Compromising the integrity of use-of-force investigations would have the counter-effect of hurting prosecutor’s cases and the county’s ability to defend itself against lawsuits.
Given three minutes to speak, Villanueva pointed to what he called an epidemic of gun violence and a 36% increase in homicides in 2020 and a 162% jump in the first three weeks of the new year.
“That’s almost one life lost every day to violence in our communities,” Villanueva said. “And the challenges faced in my department are unheard of in past administrations.”
He said the department is working on improving investigation processes, and invoked the “need to work together for a common cause.”
But that did not seem to ease supervisors’ concerns.
“Much to my dismay we’ve had false pretenses of collaboration and cooperation from the Sheriff’s Department,” said Solis, the board’s chair. “We have a long way to go in restoring the trust of the community in the Sheriff’s Department. That is the sheriff’s responsibility but it’s also ours as the board.”
It wasn’t clear whether the Board would take any action on their legal options. And they appeared to want to wait until the completion of the attorney general’s investigation before taking whatever the next step would be.
The board’s newest member, Holly Mitchell, said the attorney general’s announcement of an investigation “was alarming, to say the least.”
Mitchell stressed that law enforcement transparency was vital, beyond a four-year election cycle.
“However, this will never be enough about good-faith cooperation and collaboration from the sheriff, she said. “Absent that, I believe we have a responsibility to act.”
Solis also highlighted that voters have the power to remove the sheriff when he comes up for reelection, a point that Supervisors Janice Hahn and Kathryn Barger have stressed in previous meetings.
Barger reiterated that position Tuesday, saying she was “opposed to taking action to unilaterally remove the sheriff or changing policies to instead have that position be appointed,” Barger said. “It’s not our jurisdiction to take power away from the people.”
“Most of (the options) look like a heavy lift to me,” Kuehl said, “but that doesn’t mean that they wouldn’t be possible.”
City News Service contributed to this report
