Quantcast
Home / agencies / Maricopa County OKs spending in profiling case

Maricopa County OKs spending in profiling case

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio announces dozens of arrests in a prostitution sting during a news conference at Maricopa County Sheriff's Office Headquarters Wednesday, Dec. 18, 2013, in Phoenix. Maricopa County sheriff's deputies made dozens of arrests in the sting in which undercover officers posed as 16-year-old girls as men responded to an online ad. The investigation also resulted in numerous drug-related arrests. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin)

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio announces dozens of arrests in a prostitution sting during a news conference at Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Headquarters Wednesday, Dec. 18, 2013, in Phoenix. Maricopa County sheriff’s deputies made dozens of arrests in the sting in which undercover officers posed as 16-year-old girls as men responded to an online ad. The investigation also resulted in numerous drug-related arrests. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin)

Maricopa County officials approved the first installment Wednesday of nearly $22 million in estimated taxpayer costs for complying with a racial profiling ruling against Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s office.

The vote by the county Board of Supervisors gives Arpaio’s office $7.6 million for the rest of the current fiscal year that ends June 30.

The remaining $14.2 million are expected to be paid in the following year. And county taxpayers also would have to pick up an additional $10 million in staff and other costs each year beginning in mid-2015 to comply with the judge’s order.

In May, a judge ruled Arpaio’s office has systematically singled out Latinos in its regular traffic and immigration patrols.

Those who filed the case didn’t seek monetary damages and instead wanted a declaration that Arpaio’s office engaged in profiling.

Compliance costs include the expense of installing video cameras in patrol vehicles, hiring a court-appointed official to monitor the agency’s operations and training to ensure officers aren’t making unconstitutional arrests.

Arpaio is appealing the ruling.

None of the supervisors voiced opposition to Wednesday’s funding measure.

Last week, one supervisor said the compliance costs are proof that local police agencies such as the sheriff’s office have no business in immigration enforcement.

Arpaio has said he doesn’t regret getting involved in immigration enforcement and is duty-bound to enforce immigration laws passed at the Legislature in recent years.

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

2 comments

  1. It’s long overdue for TERM LIMITS for County Sheriffs, County Attorneys and County Assessors. Decades of entrenched power = tyranny. Meanwhile, the taxpayers are picking up the tab for abuse of power, lawlessness, wrongful deaths and a broken and bloated criminal justice system.

  2. Time for the Sheriff to go the way of LA County Sheriff Baca — resign. Taxpayers cannot afford the irresponsible behavior and abuse of power leading to multi-million dollar lawsuits.

    L.A. needs a better way to pick and keep tabs on its sheriff – latimes.com

    http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-sheriff-baca-commission-20140106,0,4746203.story

    “On Monday, a Los Angeles County employee got approval to begin circulating a petition for a statewide ballot initiative that would take another tack: imposing term limits on sheriffs (as well as district attorneys and assessors). As The Times’ editorial noted, Los Angeles County voters overwhelmingly adopted an initiative in 2002 to do just that, but Baca went to court and had it thrown out as unconstitutional. The new proposal would change the state Constitution instead of the county charter.

    Term limits, just like supermajority requirements, are anti-democratic in that they allow one generation of voters to limit the power and choices of future generations. But with Los Angeles County sheriff elections, we’re already dealing with a system in which traditional checks and balances don’t apply and the substance of democracy is compromised while the form lulls citizens, voters and taxpayers into believing all is working as it should. We can do better than term limits. But maybe we’re already doing worse.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Scroll To Top