The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors will hear recommendations on Tuesday about the role and responsibility of a panel that will oversee the Sheriff’s Department.
The supervisors, in a split decision, voted in December to create a Civilian Oversight Commission for the Sheriff’s Department. Supervisors Mark Ridley-Thomas, Hilda Solis and Sheila Kuehl were in favor of the commission.
At Tuesday’s board meeting a working group that has spent months coming up with recommendations about the commission’s function will make its pitch to the supervisors.
The supervisors are not expected to vote Tuesday on the recommendations but will take any action at a future meeting.
The call for an oversight panel was prompted by a string of abuse and mistreatment of inmates by deputies in the county’s jails. Three former deputies were convicted last month of beating a visitor to the jail and falsifying reports to cover it up. Federal prosecutors said 14 current or former members of the Sheriff’s Department have been convicted of various crimes. Others, like former Sheriff Lee Baca’s second-in-command, former Undersheriff Paul Tanaka, await trial. Tanaka is accused of obstruction of justice and conspiring to obstruct justice.
A number of reforms have been made to the county’s jails, including a new sheriff, Jim McDonnell, who was elected in November on a reform agenda.
The Sheriff’s Department has also entered into several settlement agreements with the federal government involving excessive use of force and access to mental health care and suicide prevention for inmates.
The working group, which consisted of an appointee from each supervisor, the Sheriff’s Department’s Inspector General Max Huntsman and Neal Tyler, executive officer of the Sheriff’s Department, agreed on most of the recommendations for the oversight commission. The group was divided in two of the recommendations: that the supervisors ask the voters to amend the county charter so that the commission may be granted subpoena power and that retired LASD personnel may not sit on the commission.
Under the proposal, each supervisor will appoint a commissioner and four commissioners will be appointed by majority vote of the supervisors, a commissioner may serve up to two three-year terms, commissioners will be compensated up to $5,000 a year plus expenses, no current or former LASD employees and no current employees of other police departments may sit on the commission, and the group will meet at least once a month and produce an annual report.
Dean Hansell, who chaired the working group, said the oversight commission is more complicated than the Los Angeles Police Commission because the sheriff is elected. The sheriff isn’t required to take direction from the Board of Supervisors, although McDonnell supported the creation of the oversight panel.
The commission will report to the board and to the sheriff and will serve as a liaison between the community and the Sheriff’s Department and the community and the Board of Supervisors. The inspector general would report to the commission and work closely with it.
The panel will examine the department’s practices and patterns and can ensure accountability in any reforms that are put in place, Hansell said.
Members of the public who spoke at several community meetings overwhelmingly wanted the commission to have subpoena power to give the panel “teeth.”
Hansell, an attorney who sat on the Los Angeles Police Commission, said he felt subpoena power was important to be used as a potential “club.” He also said it could come into play if a third-party vendor in the jails did not feel compelled to share documents with the sheriff.
Hansell said he hopes the supervisors follow the recommendations of the group, although they might not opt to give the commission subpoena power.
“It’s inherently more difficult than any other issue,” he said. “With that exception, I would hope that all the other recommendations would be adopted by the supervisors.”
