What do we pay the sheriff for anyway?

Sacramento County Sheriff Scott Jones has resisted oversight from the Board of Supervisor and the inspector general. (Photo by Foon Rhee)

Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office struggles to clear violent crimes as supervisors hear ‘defund’ message

Despite receiving a lion’s share of county revenue, the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office solved few rapes, robberies and burglaries last year, continuing one of the bleakest crime-clearing records of any law enforcement agency in California.

According to the California Department of Justice, a reported crime is “cleared” when a suspect is arrested or charged. That means that someone doesn’t have to be convicted of a crime for it to be considered “cleared” by the Justice Department’s standards. Yet, even with that more generous definition, the Sheriff’s Office only cleared 38% of violent crimes in 2019, well below the state average of 45.7%.

Source: California Department of Justice. Illustration by Katelynn Mitrano

The Sheriff’s Office’s success rate is even worse in forcible rape cases. Sheriff’s detectives cleared only 9.3% of the 161 sexual assaults they investigated, the department’s third worst clearance rate since at least 1985 and well below the statewide clearance rate of 35.9%.

Similarly, the Sheriff’s Office only cleared 5.6% of the 8,067 property crimes it investigated, including 5.5% of 2,276 burglaries. Both clearance rates represented the second worst for the department in at least 20 years.

The department hit historic lows in several clearance rate categories in 2016, when it solved the fewest homicides, rapes, robberies and burglaries in at least 20 years, according to figures reported to the state Justice Department.

The one bright spot last year came in the Sheriff’s Office’s ability to clear the most serious crime—murder. It cleared 32 out of 36 homicides last year, a clearance rate of 88.9%.

A sheriff’s spokeswoman didn’t respond to a question about why the department has had success with homicide cases but struggled with other violent crimes, particularly sexual assault. Clearance rates can sometimes be skewed by arrests in cold cases, as in 2009, when the Sheriff’s Office’s clearance rate for homicides exceeded 100% (113.9).

Outside of homicides, the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office had worse rates than other California sheriffs’ departments of its size or those with larger populations and more crimes. SN&R was unable to find another law enforcement agency with a worse record when it came to investigating sexual assaults. The Orange County Sheriff’s Department cleared 136.4% rape cases last year, indicating that it closed multiple cold cases. The Alameda County Sheriff’s Department cleared 77.8% of the rapes it investigated last year, while smaller, less funded sheriffs’ departments in Kern and San Bernardino counties reported rape clearance rates in the 20s.

Yet, despite civil unrest over systemic police brutality and one of the worst economic crises on record backstopping calls to defund traditional law enforcement, an agency’s ability to solve crimes rarely comes up during budget hearings.

Urging divestment, but no mention of unsolved crimes

That held true last month, when the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors approved a placeholder budget that included an additional $3.1 million for the embattled Sheriff’s Office.

Supervisor Phil Serna cast the lone dissenting vote, repeating a futile protest from last fall.

“Again, last September there was not a recommendation from either the CEO or the sheriff for body cameras, so I couldn’t in good conscience—representing the people of the first district—support the budget of the sheriff,” Serna said at the June 16 meeting. “So I will continue not to support the budget with this carry-over for the sheriff’s unit.”

Sheriff Scott Jones

Sheriff Scott Jones has long dragged his feet on bringing body-worn cameras to his department, opposing them outright for several years before softening his position and saying he had concerns about their cost and usage.

He has also hobbled efforts to allow external oversight of his department through a county inspector general and fought a losing effort to maintain a lucrative immigrant detention contract with the Department of Homeland Security.

County CEO Nav Gill told supervisors that he and Jones were working on bringing a financing proposal for body-worn cameras to them in September, when a final budget is to be adopted.

“That is a priority I heard from you loud and clear,” Gill said.

The Sheriff’s Office receives more than $400 million a year, making it one of the most well-resourced agencies in the region.

By comparison, the Sacramento Police Department is slated to receive $157 million in 2020-21.

Approximately one third of the Sheriff’s Office’s budget goes toward running two jails, but that still leaves hundreds of millions of dollars to solve crimes. And even with crime rates dropping over the past two decades to some of their lowest figures in that span while the sheriff’s budget has remained stable, the department has struggled to solve crimes.

Despite receiving less than half the budget of the Sheriff’s Office, the Sacramento Police Department actually investigated more violent crimes last year (3,223) and cleared more of them (40.4%).

According to a budget appropriation document, the Sheriff’s Office could receive more money than it has in at least six years when a final budget is adopted in September. That appropriations document lays out $553 million for the department in 2020-21.

At last month’s board meeting, 124 members of the public submitted written comments, most of those demanding supervisors to defund the Sheriff’s Office and reallocate those resources into community services.

Serna said those comments represented the “tip of the iceberg” and that his district had received thousands of emails since the Memorial Day killing of George Floyd in Minnesota.

“Some of those stories that were told in those emails were very poignant, some of them very sad and some of them would probably anger anyone,” Serna said.

Our content is free, but not free to produce

If you value our local news, arts and entertainment coverage, become an SN&R supporter with a one-time or recurring donation. Help us keep our reporters at work, bringing you the stories that need to be told.

Newsletter

Stay Updated

For the latest local news, arts and entertainment, subscribe to our newsletter.
We'll tell you the story behind the story.

3 Comments on "What do we pay the sheriff for anyway?"

  1. Avatar Richard J. Miskanis | September 7, 2020 at 4:43 pm | Reply

    How nice to see an unbiased report on the Sac Sheriff’s Office… NOT!

  2. The sheriff’s dept. only answers the calls they want to! Years ago I had a neighbor who got a restraining order against her boyfriend they wouldn’t come out on him breaking the restraining order, and she asked me to watch her place while she was working out of town. He would come over and unscrew the spotlights and break into her place. When I called the sheriff they told me they would not come out unless I said “robbery in progress” because that told them there was a possibility that he was still on the property, and they had a chance of catching him. If I just said he had broken in they would not come!

  3. * The lowest clearance rate of any law enforcement agency in a city of this size.
    * The second highest-paid executive of any law enforcement agency in the city of this size (nationally).
    * The most expensive regional law enforcement agency, in terms of settlements for both internal issues (retaliation, sexual harassment, etc) and external behavior (brutality, inappropriate response, lack of response) in the history of the United States.

    Clearly, if you are anti-big government, you would hate Jones & this department.

    This report echoes everything I’ve heard from my deputy and detective friends.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*