Sheriff May Sue to Keep Funds

Ventura County Sheriff Bob Brooks said Tuesday he is considering a lawsuit to force the county Board of Supervisors to boost his budget by millions of dollars he believes were illegally cut.

Brooks contends the supervisors have unlawfully withheld about $8.5 million from his department since it voted two years ago to change the way it funds public safety programs.

His lawsuit would also benefit the district attorney, public defender and probation chief, who share in protected public safety funding under a 1995 law.

Dist. Atty. Greg Totten said he agrees with Brooks’ contention that supervisors broke the law and maintains his office is owed about $2.5 million.

Reduced funding threatens law enforcement’s ability to control gangs and drug-related offenses at a time when the crime rate is beginning to creep back up, Brooks said.

Supervisors, meanwhile, appear unwilling to offer any additional dollars for the coming fiscal year, a standoff that may force court action, the sheriff said.

“The safe reputation of the county is at stake,” Brooks said. “I feel it is a doomsday scenario for the county and I cannot wait any longer.”

In a letter sent to supervisors last week, an attorney for Brooks requested that the sheriff be permitted to hire a private law firm to pursue the possibility of court action.

Independent counsel is necessary, said attorney William H. Hair, because County Counsel Frank Sieh represents the Board of Supervisors, creating a conflict of interest.

A battle over the county’s public safety budgets has flared for nearly a decade.

It pits the Board of Supervisors against a powerful law enforcement empire built by Brooks’ and Totten’s predecessors, former Sheriff Larry Carpenter and former Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury.

The two lawmen were the chief backers of a 1995 ordinance that requires the county to give all of the proceeds from a special half-cent sales tax to the four public safety agencies.

Supervisors agreed to approve the ordinance only after Carpenter and Bradbury collected 58,000 signatures and threatened to take the issue before voters.

In addition to dividing up that $50-million annual pot, the ordinance calls for the four departments to receive “associated inflationary costs.”

For five years, the board allowed the departments to include salary and benefit hikes in that formula, resulting in annual increases of 7% to 10%. But two years ago, the board voted to alter the formula to reflect the Consumer Price Index, about 3.75%.

Brooks and Totten contend that any change to the ordinance must be approved by voters and that the 2001 board decision to alter the inflation formula was illegal.

Brooks’ request will likely be discussed by supervisors in a closed session next week. It is not expected to be met with much sympathy from the supervisors, who have repeatedly told law enforcement they must learn to live within their means.

Board Chairwoman Judy Mikels, who supported the 1995 ordinance, said she is not in favor of approving outside counsel. She noted the county is facing a budget gap of at least $15 million for the coming fiscal year.

“I don’t think we do the public justice spending tax dollars in court when it’s our job to work this out,” Mikels said.

Absent a resolution, Mikels said she favors taking the issue to the voters.

“In order to finally settle this, let’s take it back to the voters and let them tell us exactly what they were thinking,” she said.

Supervisor Steve Bennett, who has led the charge to rein in public safety spending, said he would not approve Brooks’ request. Law enforcement departments are already slated to receive 82% of new general fund money the county expects to receive next year, he said.

“The taxpayers would find it bizarre to hire an attorney to sue ourselves,” he said. “The sheriff has a right to ask for an attorney under certain circumstances and this doesn’t meet those circumstances.”