Critics question last-minute recommendation for overseer of Sacramento Sheriff’s Office
The Sacramento County Board of Supervisors could vote Tuesday on the new inspector general to oversee the Sheriff’s Office. But objections are being raised that the name of the recommended candidate, Mark Evenson, was only revealed Monday, less than 24 hours before the meeting.
The disclosure of the recommended candidate came from Board Chair Patrick Kennedy only after an inquiry from The Sacramento Bee.
The reason for the late notice? Kennedy and Sheriff Scott Jones only completed interviews of the three finalists for the job Monday morning. As a result, the recommendation came too late to include it in the agenda packet for Tuesday’s meeting.
The position is tasked with auditing, reviewing and independently investigating deputy-involved shootings or in-custody deaths.
The failure to provide more notice of the candidate recommended for the $130,000-a-year county position raises serious legal concerns, said Kelly Aviles, an open government and media attorney with Californians Aware.
“The purpose of the Brown Act is to allow public comment,” Aviles said. “If you provide so little information that the public wouldn’t have enough information to provide any meaningful comment, it’s worthless.”
Kennedy initially told The Bee that he wasn’t concerned that the name of the recommended candidate wasn’t disclosed earlier, saying, “I don’t see a longer period of time coming up with a different outcome.”
After inquiries from The Bee and other supervisors, Kennedy later told the county clerk and board he was recommending the item be presented only for discussion, and that a final vote be held during the board’s Dec. 10 meeting.
A vote on a new inspector general would end a yearlong saga regarding the accountability over the Sheriff’s Office, which began when Jones ended access to department facilities and personnel to then-Inspector General Rick Braziel in August last year.
The lockout came days after Braziel released a report that was critical of the deputy-involved shooting of an emotionally-troubled black man in May 2017. Braziel’s contract with the county expired last November and was not renewed.
After the fallout, the board voted in December to draft a new agreement between the county and the Sheriff’s Office that would clarify and codify the inspector general’s access to the Sheriff’s Office.
That new memorandum of understanding will also be voted on during Tuesday’s meeting. But that contract was not publicly available online for viewing until Monday morning. Supervisors were not notified by the county clerk of agenda materials on the Office of the Inspector General until 10:14 a.m.
Sacramento County Counsel Lisa Travis said in an email that the Brown Act only requires that an agenda with brief general descriptions be posted with 72-hour notice. “There is no legal requirement to include any materials when posting the agenda,” she wrote.
Supervisor Phil Serna called the process “rushed” and said, “As far as I’m concerned, it’s absolutely not ripe for consideration.” He said he has asked County Executive Nav Gill to move discussions on the inspector general to a later date.
“I just think it’s absurd that we’re going, mysterious person number 1 or 2 is going to be revealed tomorrow,” Serna said. “That makes absolutely no sense.
“I’m not objecting to any person or the structure of the MOU, I just can’t make an informed decision this close to the board hearing, and if I can’t, I gotta believe my constituents cannot and it’s completely unfair to them.”
Kennedy said he is confident that Evenson is a candidate “who’s going to do a good job.” He added that the quick turnaround is part of his commitment to the public to re-hire an inspector general as soon as possible.
“It’s taken a lot longer than anticipated,” Kennedy said. “Delaying it further doesn’t serve the public or board or community’s needs.”
Sheriff’s Office spokeswoman Sgt. Tess Deterding declined to comment on the selection process, saying in a text, “This is a County process and a County (inspector general), so inquiries need to go through the County.”
Who are the inspector general candidates?
Kennedy told The Bee on Monday that Evenson was the top choice for the job. Evenson, who recently retired after serving as Brentwood Police Chief since 2006, previously worked as a captain with the Seattle Police Department. Evenson now lives in Sacramento County, Kennedy said.
As for the other finalists, Kennedy and Jones have shared little about who they are. According to the staff report, two were individual contractors, and one was a specialized legal firm, not an individual.
By Oct. 4, 15 complete applications were submitted to Bob Murray and Associates, the recruitment firm the county hired to find candidates. The firm then interviewed candidates and whittled down the pool to five, and gave their recommendations to Kennedy and Jones on Oct. 24. Kennedy and Jones then picked three to be interviewed Monday.
Representatives from the Deputy Sheriff’s Association and the Law Enforcement Management Association were also present during the finalists’ interviews to observe.
Kennedy said that David Devine, county director of personnel services, told him that the county does not release the names of individuals not selected because it is a “confidential personnel matter.”
Has this happened before?
There are two key differences between the current selection process and the last time an inspector general was picked in 2015.
First, after then-Board Chair Serna and Jones interviewed two finalists, the candidates met with two additional panels – one with community representatives from each of the supervisors’ districts, and one with DSA and LEMA representatives. Those panels then gave additional feedback to Serna and Jones, according to the staff report.
Second, the name of the recommended candidate, Rick Braziel, was publicly available before the board approved the contract.
The agenda item to approve Braziel in November 2015 highlighted his “long and distinguished career in law enforcement,” including his experience as former Sacramento Police Department Chief and a consultant for critical incident cases.
What’s in the contract between the county and the Sheriff’s Office?
Highlights from the MOU include:
▪ The Sheriff’s Office will cooperate with the Inspector General and provide records and information requested. The OIG will not have the power to question personnel involved in a specific incident without the Sheriff’s approval.
▪ The Sheriff’s Office will be able to deny a request for information, so long as the office includes “a full explanation of the reasons for the denial.” It’s unclear what those reasons could be.
▪ The Sheriff will have prior review of all reports that will be publicly released by the Inspector General.
▪ If parties fail to comply with the MOU, or a party believes another isn’t complying with the MOU, a mediator (selected by the Board Chair and the Sheriff from a pool of retired or semi-retired Sacramento Superior Court Judges) will oversee a dispute resolution process.
▪ The Inspector General will be on a “Critical Incident call-out roster” to be notified when situations like an in-custody death occurs. However, that access will end when “a decision is made, pursuant to the dispute resolution process, that it is appropriate to restrict OIG access.”
The hearing on the vote for the new Inspector General and MOU will begin 10:15 a.m. Tuesday during the Board of Supervisor’s regular meeting.
This story was originally published November 18, 2019 at 4:00 PM.