Supervisors Advance Oversight of Sheriff Department Plan Despite Pushback from Honsal
Humboldt County Sheriff Billy Honsal refers to a binder of his office’s policies and procedures. [Screenshot from the video]
Responding to public demand for creating a sheriff’s oversight committee, Humboldt County’s Board of Supervisors will consider approval of an ordinance on it.
At the April 28 board meeting, a majority of supervisors voted to have an ad hoc committee develop a draft ordinance that will be reviewed in September.
Last March, a group of residents asked that a ballot measure creating a new policing oversight board be discussed on a future agenda.
A written staff report said what’s on the table is an “oversight system” including a “sheriff’s policy and practice board” and an Inspector General’s Office which will “operate independently but report to the Board of Supervisors.”
The new committee’s tasks will include policy review and “reviewing misconduct complaints and major incidents,” according to the staff report.
Creation of an oversight committee and Inspector General’s Office was recommended in the 2024 county Grand Jury report.
Supervisors were open to the idea but supported implementing it via ordinance rather a ballot measure, which would have to be submitted to the county’s Elections Department by early August and if approved, could only be amended through another election.
County Sheriff Billy Honsal doesn’t support either option.
In a lengthy statement, he described creation of an oversight committee as unnecessary as “the sheriff’s office has independent means for oversight and review of critical incidents and allegations of serious misconduct involving its employees.”
He named several oversight mechanisms, including the state’s Attorney General’s Office and Department of Justice, and Humboldt’s District Attorney’s Office, Human Rights Commission and Grand Jury.
Honsal said he “strives to uphold the public trust and interest above my own” and has gained the community’s confidence.
“Despite what is being alleged that there’s some kind of wholehearted mistrust with the sheriff’s office, I disagree,” he said “I believe that the trust this community has with the Sheriff’s Office is at an all-time high and I ask each one of you to prove me wrong.”
Referring to a voluminous binder of his office’s policies and procedures, Honsal said “anyone can critically review these policies, you don’t have to be on an oversight committee — any citizen can come up here and read objectively our policies and offer suggestions.”
He cited the example of county immigration enforcement policies, which were modified in response to public engagement.
“I ask you, why fix something that’s not broken? I’ve yet to hear the catalyst that this is necessary,” he said. “There’s no evidence to support that this current system is not working.”
Supervisor Natalie Arroyo described oversight “an opportunity for people to learn and discuss” policing procedures and “if there’s not much to do, then they wouldn’t meet too often” but it will help to have “the system in place.”
Saying Honsal is widely-respected, Supervisor Rex Bohn advised against civilian oversight.
“This is so unneeded,” he said, adding, “we’re not Minneapolis.”
Most of those who spoke during a lengthy public comment period supported police oversight.
“Sheriff Honsal, you just narrated all the ways you are open to transparency and building trust with our community and it’s really hard to reconcile why you wouldn’t want to work with an inspector general and other people to help you maintain and really lift up that transparency,” said one speaker.
An Arcata resident who identified herself as Amanda contested Honsal’s evaluation of public trust.
“I do not trust the sheriff’s – the public does not trust the sheriff’s,” she said, alleging an “inhumane war against the poor,” “displacement and harassment against the homeless” and “the excessive force seen by the response to the peaceful protests at Cal Poly.”
The April 2024 Cal Poly protests included barricades and vandalism and the Sheriff’s Office was among several law enforcement agencies that responded to what a Cal Poly statement described as “criminal activity.”
The only person opposing oversight who wasn’t connected to law enforcement was Southern Humboldt resident Thomas Mulder.
“I support the sheriff wholeheartedly,” he said, describing the oversight proposal as “ridiculous.”
Destry Henderson, president of the Humboldt Deputy Sheriff’s Organization, said oversight committees “tend to second guess without meaningful understanding of how policing works” and the proposal “appears to be designed as another opportunity to bash the hardworking low paid deputies who serve our community with honor.”
But Supervisor Steve Madrone questioned why there’s a gap between vouching for public involvement and supporting an oversight committee.
“If you want all this transparency, why not do this?” he asked.
Honsal had cited cost issues but Madrone said communities with oversight committees “have actually saved money from liabilities and lawsuits that more than covered the costs.”
Supervisors voted 4 to 1, with Bohn dissenting, to have an ordinance drafted for review this fall.
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
Maybe an oversight committee can get to the bottom of where those Antifa buses disappeared to.
Or who really killed Josiah.
That would be APD not the Sheriff’s Dept.
If they are doing this because of cal poly I have a solution, don’t commit any crimes. Why not have an oversight committee to investigate the board of supervisors? That would probably save some money.
The Grand jury could do it…………………….
The moment a cop says they don’t need oversight, they need oversight.
The Sheriff is an elected office. The BOS thinks we voted wrong and that they know better.
He ran unopposed
Maybe because he was the “right one”. Bergel ran unopposed also and probably others. I think it’s because in today’s hostile political climate where the “ENDS JUSTIFY THE MEANS” PLUS “SCORCHED EARTH POLICY ON ANYONE WHO DOESN’T AGREE WITH THE ALL IMPORTANT ME-ME-ME”, no one wants to get involved. Do you blame them?
He’s an administrative officer, not a King like Dirty Don.
Bohn firing shots at Minneapolis reads like hyperbolic rhetoric that is missing the plot by at least a mile. So what do you want to do Rex? Wait until there are literal dead protestors? What a Trainwreck that guy is.
And Honsal -with his mighty binder– is looking shady pushing back against this reasonable safeguard.
A call for civilian oversight isn’t an accusation of wrongdoing. Transparency exists to further build and maintain trust between law enforcement and the public and reduce LE escalations. In the long run implementing these kind of measures helps avoid lawsuits, and can prevent full on institutional breakdown. We’re not Minneapolis…yet.
Before you call Bohn a “train wreck” maybe you ought to know his bio. This is a man who created a sports arena for kid’s sports. Because of his tireless efforts to get the job done, we finally have a place for the youth in our community .
In addition, this is a man who has donated his time to other community efforts in so many different ways they can’t be counted. Because he differs with the “progressive/socialist” opinon that everything has to have oversight by unknown persons, appointed by unknown methods doesn’t make him a trainwreck. We live in America.
Having differing opinons is what freedom is all about. Your opinon is noted, but I hope you will re-assess the “train wreck” comment. It actually hurt my soul to read that because I, like countless other parents and grandparents, have known Rex for many years. He may “shoot from the hip”, but his heart and love for our Humboldt community is well-known and respected.
Barbara
Thank you for this. Many of us agree that Rex is an asset to Humboldt Humboldt County, even beyond his job a Supervisor. There is hardly any community event that I have ever been to that Rex hasn’t been there helping.
I am surprised that our supervisor Bushnell voted for the oversight. Somebody must have twisted her arm. Politics is a bitch.
Rex is the rock in the Board of Supervisors, Sometimes rock-solid and sometimes rock-the-boat.
Um, re: “Bushnell voted for the oversight. Somebody must have twisted her arm. Politics is a bitch.”
probably her constituents. (you didn’t just obscurely call Michelle a name)
No, just politics. Michelle is a friend. Politics is no friend to anyone.
Right…I was clarifying what you said lest somebody else misinterpret. 🙂
Thanks, I can use all the help that I can get.
I’m sorry, but even if you’re “Team Rex,” inferring that a citizens oversight committee will be appointed by “unknown methods” is a big nothing burger. Who cares how they’re appointed. Watch a few first amendment auditors. Everyone, even you has the protection and right under the Constitution to oversee and observe firsthand the business and behavior of any and all public officials in course of their duties.
Yes, and you get to do that by applying for the Grand Jury. Check it out. It’s very interesting to learn how things work or why they are not working and, after a year’s deliberation, file a report to that effect.
“Applying for the GJ??” You do understand that when Judge Learned Hand stated that a GJ could indict a ham sandwich he was serious, right? The prosecutors directing are within the executive and so is the Sheriff’s department. They can also avoid indicting a ham sandwich. Your political bent is shining through. If there’s no oversight things continue without abating. But see “Real Guest” below. That works for me.
Oh haha how wrong you are. Any one of us, at any time, in any public space can document and hold accountable all public servants, like the sheriff’s department.
No year-long lapse in time either. Real time accountability IE: citizen oversight is spelled out clearly in the first amendment to the bill of rights. We still have freedom of press in the country and we are all independent journalists who, as citizens own the public infrastructure and finance the wages of all public employees.
But, like any muscle if we don’t use it – or it gets boxes into an onerous “do that by applying for the Grand Jury” (or the sheriff tries to say ” yeah, no thanks “) our strength -and that transparency- disappears.
Why are you so invested in protecting the sheriff dept from accountability?
I have a great deal of respect for Sheriff Honsal and other law enforcement in general…
But, nobody is perfect, and we all fall from grace to one extent or another…
That’s precisely why we have the Sheriff’s Department and other law enforcement…
That being said, it would be totally irresponsible to consider the entire Sheriff’s Department, to a man, to be entirely beyond reproach in the past, presently, and/or, into the future.
The Sheriff’s department conducts public oversight and scrutiny and law enforcement…
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander…
However, there is a catch 22…
Will we also then need an oversight committee for the oversight committee, etc., etc., etc. …???
It’s a bit of a conundrum, if taken too far…
Nonetheless, I would definitely be in favor of the oversight committee, as a safeguard…
The Sheriff’s department objecting to an official group observing and scrutinizing them is a bit of a double standard, if you ask me…
Isn’t that exactly what their job is to do to everyone else…???
So, I guess I just don’t quite fully understand why they don’t just enthusiastically embrace the tables being turned…???
Who’s watching the watchers…???
Never forget the Colden Rule…
Would it be wrong of me to half jokingly “coin” a new somewhat less “precious” “proverbial” saying…???
Never forget the ” “Copper” Rule”…
“Watch Not, Lest Ye Also Be Watched”
😉 😁
I would like to know what anyone has observed from the Sheriff’s department that warrents an “oversite committee”. Don’t we have to have a reason before we layer another stressful set of rules to law enforcement, or defund them? I cannot remember a time when any law enforcement in Humboldt county had a serious claim against the Sheriff (who has many many different men elected to that office).
Antifa buses. There you go.
pepper spray incidents?
Exactly!
More stupidity from the BOS
” trust this community has with the Sheriff’s Office is at an all-time high”
Umm sure.
What are you doing about these radical antifa, no king, and indivisables?
My guess is, because they have been peacefully protesting, the only thing that will be done is monitoring them for any violent behavior. Those of us who don’t agree with them can roll our eyes and chalk it up to another TDS demonstration.
I don’t agree with them, but I would not agree with anyone organizing protests against any president. IMO, protests against a duly elected President is a protest against our country. If the president is Mandami, I might change my view, but for now, “grin and bear it” is my motto.
However, it was a little rich to see the entire Congressional democrats give a standing ovation to King Charles, while demonstrating for “no Kings”.
The comparison isn’t accurate.
King Charles III is a constitutional monarch with almost no independent power. He doesn’t make policy, pass laws, or act on his own—he follows the decisions of an elected government.
Donald Trump, as president, has and exercises extraordinary executive authority—he can issue orders, direct agencies, and shape policy and many feel he does so arbitrarily and against tradition and against law.
“No Kings” is shorthand for opposing unchecked or unilateral power, not a literal reference to someone like Charles. And applauding a visiting, largely ceremonial head of state who is gently reminding this country of its highest aspirations is appreciation of his message, not an endorsement of monarchy.
Humbly, with all the court actions against the president’s mandates, I would hardly deem his actions unchecked in any sense. The ‘No Kings’ are just one of many privately funded protest groups with TDS.
Courts pushing back actually proves the system is working, not that the concern is imaginary.
Take a close look at those judges. Bias comes to mind. And you must not have that in a judge.
Seen the recent Supreme Court ruling on the Voting Rights Act? Their ruling on abortion?
Well, that proves Mr. Clark’s point.
There was no bias in trump’s self serving, de facto effort to overthrow a duly elected government, via declaring “stolen election!”. trump tired and trump FAILED!! Such BS was his case!!
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-judiciary-shaped-by-trump-thwarts-his-election-challenges-2020-12-01/
When a random liberal judge pokes his nose in to adjudicate in favor of his own bias it is a black mark on the judicial system. Normally, all those cases thrown out by such a judge will be overturned somewhere down the line.
According to a recent Harvard poll from Mark Penn, (I think that’s the name) who was one of Clinton’s advisors and is a democrat, over 50% of the voting public are in favor of ending the Iran regime among other Trump policies.
That would mean that all the “no kings” protests are not affecting the electorate. We hear a lot about the “blue wave”. I wonder if it isn’t more fake news.
The concern may not be imaginary, but any association with the reality of it certainly is.
That the unfounded allegations of Trump being a “King” are not going unchecked by the courts just proves that the very notion of Trump being a “King”is just purely a figment of so many of the Democrats’ imagination, as a matter of fact…
It’s just a Democrat political ploy, in their ongoing efforts to regain power…
Nothing more…
Nothing less…
Joe Biden and his auto pen masters, as president, has and exercises extraordinary executive authority—he can issue orders, direct agencies, and shape policy and many feel he does so arbitrarily and against tradition and against law.
I disagree.
Barbara Leonard is on point.
Democrats feverishly protesting, ranting, and railing against the ideology of a monarch and the idea of a monarchy, and labeling President Trump as a wannabe King, and then paying homage with a standing ovation pandering to a King, is the ultimate epitome of hypocrisy…
Let’s not kid ourselves…
Obama and Biden , even Clinton used the same powers. Not only are there executive powers derived from the Constitution,but powers the Legislature delegated to the executive branch in legislation to implement and administer. The democrats are simply calling the kettle black. Their ignorance and hypocrisy is self evident.
Yeahhhh. The hypocrisy is self evident, but there’s more than enough ignorance to pass around if you just glance East.
Your first sentence explains why “no Kings” is a silly message. It appears the protesters would be happier with a King who had no independent power. Isn’t Trump’s power and ability to make policy what you are protesting?
Freedom of speech is written into the….say it with me: the 1st Amendment!
Even YOUR speech is protected, as offensive as some may find it.
My previous comment said “awaiting approval” for whatever reason, and has otherwise disappeared…
But I don’t seem to be on moderation…
Ii see it’s in the comment que, and I was even able to retrieve it…
May it will eventually post…
IF ICE knocks on Honsals door, will he give them the info they want?
This will come up again and again until it is presented as a ballot measure to be voted on by the people.
”but Madrone said communities with oversight committees “have actually saved money from liabilities and lawsuits that more than covered the costs.”
How are they going to save money? They are not preventing a wrong doing from happening. It would be done. They are just there to make sure it is not a coverup. So you gave a stupid reason, Madrone.
Independent oversight bodies often identify problems and recommend corrective actions before lawsuits are filed, lowering the civil penalties that taxpayers pay for misconduct.
The Grand Jury should do that. You know, the one we have now. If bad behavior is committed, the lawsuit will follow. No matter what is said or done after the fact.
The Grand Jury did recommend something–they recommended an oversight body.
I don’t qualify for an upvote, so I will just say thank you.
But, now you have created a new problem. We need an oversight committee for the Grand Jury.
I find it phenomenal that people do not know the function of the Grand Jury! We are the most ignorant county in California.
The Grand jury called out the County Board of Supervisors for not following the advice of the measure Z committee, and they fixed the problem. Madrone being one of the main offenders.
Maybe we should just eliminate the Grand Jury and quit wasting their time.
The problem with the Grand Jury is that cases are brought to them by the DA. A clear conflict of interest if it has to do with the sheriffs office.
It didn’t seem to be a conflict of interest when they investigated the Board of Supervisors.
Anybody can bring an issue to the Grand Jury. Please don’t confuse a citizenry anymore than they are already confused.
Your right. In California you can bring a complaint about the Sheriff’s Office to your county’s Civil Grand Jury.
But even they still refer any criminal cases to the DA. Of course I guess that would be the same with an oversight committee.
Quite the (can’t think of the word)
conundrum
Maybe you don’t know this;
AI
“A criminal grand jury determines if there is probable cause to indict someone for a crime, while a civil grand jury acts as an independent watchdog investigating local government operations, efficiency, and misconduct. Criminal grand juries are secret and focus on criminal indictments; civil grand juries issue public reports and recommendations”
Two different Grand Juries.
But who will provide oversight of the oversight committee of the grand jury who is overseer of the county?? 😉
“A 2018 Department of Justice report suggested there is little empirical evidence to demonstrate the effectiveness of oversight agencies and a national system is needed to evaluate its impact.
And at times some these groups have exacerbated tensions among local officials, law enforcement, and activists, as cited in a 2001 DOJ report reviewing citizen oversight.”
“At a high level, the auditor found that the Police Commission hasn’t accomplished much of what it’s supposed to, according to its responsibilities as they are defined in the City Charter and municipal code — the city’s laws. The oversight bodies are subject to many different requirements under Oakland law. These include responsibilities ranging from holding public meetings to procedures for removing the police chief. The auditor, who is required by law to review the police commission on a regular basis, selected 43 duties to evaluate and found that the commission and its sub-agencies are only fulfilling 26 of these. ”
“Oakland has had ten police chiefs over the past ten years. The city’s ability to retain its police chiefs is significantly lower than the average tenure of seven years that police chiefs typically serve.1
Current police chief Floyd Mitchell announced his resignation last month after 18 months on the job amid political tension with Oakland’s police commission and other police oversight bodies. Mitchell’s resignation is yet another churn in a years-running turnover of police chiefs.
Accountability and transparency to the public are hallmarks of good policing. However, Oakland’s uniquely complex and demanding oversight system has significantly weakened the police chief’s authority and control over the police department’s operations, while continuing to assign the lion’s share of responsibility for operational failures to the chief. This arrangement makes the job of Oakland’s top cop one of the most difficult, and arguably most futile, in the nation.”
https://oaklandside.org/2026/03/11/oakland-police-commission-audit-opd-funding/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_Justice_in_Policing_Act
https://www.oaklandreport.org/p/20251110-oaklands-police-commission
https://abcnews.com/US/police-oversight-boards-proliferating-work/story?id=77919091
Away from the bigger cities, the Sheriff Dept has a reputation of being selective of who they respond to. Most the time they don’t show up. When they do, the deputy is judgemental of the victim.
Let’s try this one again…
Oldest
The Real Guest Guest
The Real Guest
13 minutes ago
Awaiting approval
I have a great deal of respect for Sheriff Honsal and other law enforcement in general…
But, nobody is perfect, and we all fall from grace to one extent or another…
That’s precisely why we have the Sheriff’s Department and other law enforcement…
That being said, it would be totally irresponsible to consider the entire Sheriff’s Department, to a man, to be entirely beyond reproach in the past, presently, and/or, into the future.
The Sheriff’s department conducts public oversight and scrutiny and law enforcement…
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander…
However, there is a catch 22…
Will we also then need an oversight committee for the oversight committee, etc., etc., etc. …???
It’s a bit of a conundrum, if taken too far…
Nonetheless, I would definitely be in favor of the oversight committee, as a safeguard…
The Sheriff’s department objecting to an official group observing and scrutinizing them is a bit of a double standard, if you ask me…
Isn’t that exactly what their job is to do to everyone else…???
So, I guess I just don’t quite fully understand why they don’t just enthusiastically embrace the tables being turned…???
Who’s watching the watchers…???
Never forget the Colden Rule…
Would it be wrong of me to half jokingly “coin” a new somewhat less “precious” “proverbial” saying…???
Never forget the ” “Copper” Rule”…
“Watch Not, Lest Ye Also Be Watched”
Still “awaiting approval” for whatever reason…
I’ll try breaking it into two comments, in case there is a comment length restriction now…
“I have a great deal of respect for Sheriff Honsal and other law enforcement in general…
But, nobody is perfect, and we all fall from grace to one extent or another…
That’s precisely why we have the Sheriff’s Department and other law enforcement…
That being said, it would be totally irresponsible to consider the entire Sheriff’s Department, to a man, to be entirely beyond reproach in the past, presently, and/or, into the future.
The Sheriff’s department conducts public oversight and scrutiny and law enforcement…
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander…
Continued…
However, there is a catch 22…
Will we also then need an oversight committee for the oversight committee, etc., etc., etc. …???
It’s a bit of a conundrum, if taken too far…
Nonetheless, I would definitely be in favor of the oversight committee, as a safeguard…
The Sheriff’s department objecting to an official group observing and scrutinizing them is a bit of a double standard, if you ask me…
Isn’t that exactly what their job is to do to everyone else…???
So, I guess I just don’t quite fully understand why they don’t just enthusiastically embrace the tables being turned…???
Who’s watching the watchers…???
Never forget the Colden Rule…
Would it be wrong of me to half jokingly “coin” a new somewhat less “precious” “proverbial” saying…???
Never forget the ” “Copper” Rule”…
“Watch Not, Lest Ye Also Be Watched”
Test.
However, there is a catch 22…
Will we also then need an oversight committee for the oversight committee, etc., etc., etc. …???
It’s a bit of a conundrum, if taken too far…
Nonetheless, I would definitely be in favor of the oversight committee, as a safeguard…
The Sheriff’s department objecting to an official group observing and scrutinizing them is a bit of a double standard, if you ask me…
Isn’t that exactly what their job is to do to everyone else…???
So, I guess I just don’t quite fully understand why they don’t just enthusiastically embrace the tables being turned…???
Who’s watching the watchers…???
Never forget the Colden Rule…
Would it be wrong of me to half jokingly “coin” a new somewhat less “precious” “proverbial” saying…???
Never forget the ” “Copper” Rule”…
“Watch Not, Lest Ye Also Be Watched”
I give up…
Have a great day everyone…
I guess I’ll just be “awaiting approval”, elsewhere…
Somewhere between here and wherever all of the other disapproved commenters have ended up…
I read every one TRG.
9:53 am
LOL… All of your comments eventually came through. Bringing the old addage “A comment delayed is a comment denied” to mind.
I appreciate your thoughtful comments, sometimes I read them all the way through.
Adopt the pace of nature: her secret is patience.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson
One buzzard to another sitting in a tree… “Screw this waiting around, I’m going to go kill something”.
Any pushback to the idea of oversight means oversight is necessary. And just because cops have always had “Internal Affairs” doesn’t make it right. Fox guarding the henhouse doesn’t make any sense to me.
They should be community volunteers, without pay, stipend, or any other financial compensations inho. that would limit ‘in house’ bias to an extent.
A few would still show up, much like the same 10 people that show up to every Free Palestine protest. They got nothing but time.
In anything that is of a political nature, telling the difference between the foxes and the hens hard. Underfunding and limiting the power of such commissions versus making them a tool of politician’s agenda means that is likely all they will ever be.
Such commissions maybe be useful in cases where a police department is corrupt but in cases where the problem is social, not so much apparently. Basically it seems that police can reduce incidents of politics misconduct by reducing policing. Less policing means less chance for conflict. But then crime catches up.
“Touted by former U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch as a national model for community-led police reform, the collaborative agreement saw the police department, civic government, police unions and local civil rights groups act in partnership for a reform program backed by court supervision.” But by 2025 the police chief was dismissed.”She is being used as a political scapegoat and a political pawn,” Imm said at the time. “Terri deserves better than this. Cincinnati deserves better than this.”
The city later announced it had hired Frost Brown Todd to serve as an independent counsel conducting the review into the police chief.
On March 31, the firm released its report summary of the investigation, which stated that Theetge had “not been an effective leader.”
Politicians are masters of shifting blame. And spending public money to do it.
https://theconversation.com/american-cities-have-long-struggled-to-reform-their-police-but-isolated-success-stories-suggest-community-and-officer-buy-in-might-be-key-159618
https://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/hamilton-county/cincinnati/timeline-teresa-theetges-tenure-as-cincinnati-police-chief
Tom Mulder said the oversight would be “ridiculous.”
What part of Humboldt County government isn’t ridiculous? I suggest the supervisors adopt “Ridiculous” as the new county motto.
I think the Sheriff is doing as good a job as possible in this ridiculous county.
While Humboldt County supervisors advance plans for a new civilian oversight board to monitor the Sheriff’s Department—complete with an ad hoc committee drafting an ordinance by September—local residents face far more pressing failures in how public resources are allocated. What Humboldt truly needs is aggressive oversight of the Department of Social Services to investigate widespread local allegations that illegal aliens are accessing HUD housing assistance, full-scope Medi-Cal, and food benefits. Legal citizens and residents endure months or even years on waiting lists for subsidized housing, struggle with weeks-long delays for doctor appointments at local clinics, and often resort to emergency rooms for routine issues like coughs and colds. Many legal residents scrape by on minimal food stamp allotments that barely cover basic needs each month.
Our schools, already strained by declining enrollment and tight budgets, are further burdened trying to educate the children of illegal aliens at taxpayer expense.
The real scandal demanding scrutiny isn’t routine law enforcement practices, but the Department of Social Services’ apparent willingness to extend costly benefits to those who entered the country illegally—expenses that drive up taxes and reduce services for law-abiding Humboldt families. Instead of tying up the Sheriff’s hands with another layer of bureaucracy, county leaders should prioritize supporting ICE in deporting individuals who broke immigration laws to get here and have ignored removal orders from the current administration in Washington. Resources belong first to citizens and legal residents, not those here unlawfully. It’s time for common-sense priorities that put Humboldt County taxpayers and legal community members first.
There have been a lot of very good people moved here illegally. My heart goes out to them, and I wish that they might have a path to citizenship.
However, I also wish that the ne’er-do-wells, drug dealers and MS13 gangsters could be deported, and the Sheriff’s department would cooperate with that effort. Sort that one out!
The tip would be that any illegal arrested and convicted of a crime could be deported instead of just releasing them back onto society.
It doesn’t seem that complicated.
Past administrations created this complicated situation. The border problem seems to be solved. The barn door is now shut. Sorting who goes and who stays is heart wrenching. Entire families are involved.
If the BOS is going to do it then my hope is that community members supportive of Law Enforcement step up to prevent the stacking of it by Defund the Police deranged leftists
Odd that you would state supportive of law enforcement instead of people who desire to no matter how painful ensure that the law is equally applied and enforced. While it does not work this way , i feel that officers should be held to a higher standard as they better know the law or are at least supposed to . When their word tends to have more value in courts then a citizens . Yet it has been prove time and time again officers are no better morally than those with whom they are tasked to enforce the law . Granted that we tend to only hear of the bad apples as the saying goes a person can do a million things right but is only remembered for the 1 bad thing they did . I also notice that the cases we hear about are not rookie officers , meaning they have experience, training and either knew better or were allowed to act in such manors by fellow officers for some period of time before catching headlines , personally officers should police themselves before attempting to police others
The question should be when faced with a situation where someone in his family , close circle of friends or even any supportive political figure commits a crime maybe not a crime that would be headline grabbing but still a crime in which he would expect one of his deputies to effect an arrest , if it was done where he had witnessed it or had enough evidence would he , follow through and make the arrest or would they get a stern warning about ensuring not to commit those offenses around him and leave it at that . Anytime you have someone that through the police powers of the state is afforded personal discretion , they must be watched .
personally between da discretion officer discretion there are to many ways in which laws and regulations are not equally enforced which makes it really hard to support the rule of law , as on a hole in this state it stands out like glowing neon that regulations , and laws even policies are not equally applied or enforced .
Many of the things law enforcement uses today to enhance their effectiveness are things that are very similar to the things that when i was growing up the KGB used to control and police the USSR . Sure they have policies that supposedly limits the use of these tools yet time and time again it is discovered that these tools are abused yet no charges get filed they get warnings or additional training if that and i have a feeling that at times the training is how to do so without getting caught wink wink nod nod good ole boy us verses them mentality . That feeling comes from a deep distrust of the system in general that comes from watching it work and just because he might not act in this manor does not mean that when he is replaced others would be the same so what is the harm if there is nothing to hide to set in place a system to ensure future citizens can be free of such negative actions while he is in the job and can show these committees what took look for and how to be the most effective .
having persons who have no ties with law enforcement in a oversight role will in fact go a long way to rebuilt faith in law enforcement for many people and anyone in law enforcement that does not have that as part of their mission should not be entrusted with enforcing the law
Why did this community let Honsal’s declaration that he is a “constitutional sheriff” slide? Look it up! It’s deluded and creepy.
Unless respecting the Constitution as the highest law of the land. Then objecting to that idea is what is creepy.
What he says he is and what his actions show is two different things.
Honsal occupies the Office of the Sheriff, an elected position. But the Sheriff’s Department is made up of the men and women and operations. Honsal says the Board of Supervisors holds no role or authority over the Sheriff’s Office. That is not entirely true. But they do have a role and some authority over the Sheriff’s Department. They do not command them, but they set the budgets, personnel policies and negotiate with the DSA, among other things. The Sheriff himself does not. An oversight committee is well within the domain of the Board of Supervisors. Honsal insinuates that the Board does not, and this is where his whole “Constitutional Sheriff” bullshit really starts to stink. It’s really my only problem with him. He does actually have some accountability to the Board. But there is a big political movement amongst the California Sheriffs to push this narrative that they are an independent executive which is not how the California Constitution actually works. Remember when deputies would knock on the door and say “Sheriff’s Department! Open up!” Now notice that over the past ten or so year’s they say “Sheriff’s Office! Open up!” This is very deliberate. So if the Sheriff wants to keep nefariously pushing this Unitary Executive theory of the Sheriff’s Office and Department, then why should the County of Humboldt and its Board of Supervisors continue to pay for their insurance? If Honsal thinks our elected Board has no authority, who signs the checks and appropriates resources? He is also accountable to the Auditor, DA and a bunch of other agencies and positions. The funny thing is the Sheriff’s Department is not under any State law that it has to provide patrol activities. The Board could in theory defund the patrol function and move it to a new Police Department and hire their own Chief. San Francisco does this. Maybe the Sheriff should think it through before pushing his constitutional sheriff narrative.
The sheriff’s office is the ultimate authority of law enforcement in Humboldt county. They are in charge of any disaster, natural or manmade, up to and including a meteor strike. They are incharge of riot control, preservation of crime scenes, protection of dead bodies and more. They get the blame when anything goes wrong.
Technically they would be in charge of overseeing the oversight committee.
He may currently be the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the County unincorporated area but he is not the Chief Executive of the County. In California the County Board is both the Executive and Legislative body and even has quasi judicial roles. Everything you mentioned above, can legally be removed from the authority of the Sheriff by the Board. Patrol can be reassigned. OES can be reassigned. Coroner can be reassigned. There’s only two function the Sheriff is legally required to provide. The Jail and services to the Courts in the form of Bailiffs and court process serving such as evictions etc. In San Francisco, the Chief Law Enforcement Officer is the Chief of Police, not the San Francisco Sheriff. So legally, he is the unincorporated area’s Chief Law Enforcement Officer only by the permission of the Board of Supervisors, who cannot remove him directly, but remove his command right out from under him. He better remember that as his rhetoric continues to exaggerate his authority. Some day there may be real push back to move this option forward.
Well, until then. What I said is correct. If you think the Board of Supervisers are a better law enforcement agency… bring it on.
Posse Commitatus type county sheriffs need reminding that they have ZERO Constitutional authority. They are merely employees of an administrative division of a state. The state is the primary sovereign, lawfully speaking.
Dear honsel , have I got some stuff to tell you