Entering Lake County quickly reveals, based on the signage, which election is most important. While small campaign signs dot the landscape supporting potential state lawmakers, those are overshadowed by the 4-by-8 foot behemoths supporting one of the three candidates for sheriff.
When I covered the cops and courts beat about seven years ago in Gallatin County, the ranking officers and sheriffs were heavily scrutinized, with administrative disputes that were prevalent and public. But I never considered those jobs especially political. After all, if a deputy decides to arrest someone it shouldn’t be based on whether they voted Republican or Democrat.
But the job description for sheriff has apparently expanded since then. In many places, it now involves more than upholding the law and running a department. A law enforcement candidate currently shares his or her opinion on a variety of matters – one of which is how much power the position holds.
What once was primarily viewed as the top administrative job at one law enforcement agency among many is now something much more. The sheriff’s position has expanded for some who believe the job also includes fending off the long arm of the federal government.
Perhaps the most recognizable in this group is County Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa, Ariz., who is as much a political lightning rod as law enforcement officer. He endorses candidates, makes speeches and is lauded by supporters for cracking down on illegal immigration. He calls himself “America’s toughest sheriff” and has allegedly refused cooperation with federal officials investigating his office for discrimination.
Another prominent voice in expanding sheriff’s powers is former Sheriff Richard Mack, who said last year in Polson, “the sheriff is the ultimate authority in the county. We’re going to expect top law enforcement officials to uphold the Constitution.”
Nothing about the speech was all that controversial, nor are the positions of the Oath Keepers, a group of law enforcement officers and veterans that has gained prominence over the last few years. The Oath Keepers list, “orders we will not obey,” which include “disarming the American people,” “conducting warrantless searches” and “blockading American cities.” I would hope not.
Yet endorsements from these Arizona officers and membership in these groups mean something. Steve Kendley, an Independent candidate for sheriff in Lake County, touts his Oath Keepers credentials and the backing of Mack in his campaign.
Rex Nichols, a Lincoln County sheriff’s candidate, is also an Oath Keeper, and believes the position is the highest law enforcer in the land, above federal agents.
This is all fine. But all this emphasis on who’s best at interpreting the Constitution and the power of the sheriff has trumped the other basic duties of law enforcement in many elections.
In Lake County, serious allegations have been leveled against the department and a third-party group has demanded that Sheriff Lucky Larson and Undersheriff Jay Doyle, a candidate to replace his boss who is not running for reelection, resign.
Last week, authorities raided the home of Terry Leonard, the man behind much of the criticism. The Lake County Attorney Mitch Young said Leonard is at the center of “an ongoing investigation.” The Commission of Political Practices is also looking into a complaint filed by Doyle against the political action committee.
It’s unclear how any of this will affect the race among Kendley, Doyle and the Democrat, Dan Yonkin. Judging by the signs in Mission Valley they each enjoy some support. But it has all succeeded in making another sheriff’s election reek of politics to the point where it has overpowered any discussion of who would make the best administrator. The latter may be boring but it is far more important to running a smooth department.