11/18 BOS Memo

[Gladiator]

[RickD6023]

That is an awesome discussion item for the Board and just by being placed on the agenda sends a message to the appointed Sheriff that she must tow the line.

However, I would not be surprised to next read that the Sheriff's attorney challenges the agenda item as being in violation of State law as a Board of Supervisors usurping the authority to issue CCW which is the exclusive responsibility of the Sheriff as assigned by the State. I hope that I'm wrong.

[RomanDad]

I feel just like Norma Rae.

[OCRancher]

This is starting to look like a real win. Let's keep it rolling, folks!!!!!!!!!

And for Mr. Norma Rae, I can't imagine you in tight jeans...

[TaxMan]

Originally Posted by OCRancher

This is starting to look like a real win. Let's keep it rolling, folks!!!!!!!!!

And for Mr. Norma Rae, I can't imagine you in tight jeans...

[AMS MIKE]

good find!

[BonoVox]

I might have a tear in my eye!


"Together We Win!!" ® Copyrighted 2008 , Quote borrowed from a man I respect...

[Ken_In_Colo]

Originally Posted by RickD6023

...However, I would not be surprised to next read that the Sheriff's attorney challenges the agenda item as being in violation of State law as a Board of Supervisors usurping the authority to issue CCW which is the exclusive responsibility of the Sheriff as assigned by the State. I hope that I'm wrong.

WOW!

That memo usurps no such authority but it is a very strong suggestion that she reverse her policy. And if the sheriff knows what's good for her, she will pay attention. If she doesn't agree to the way the Sups want their county run, she should resign.

This is what our country is all about: military/law enforcement answering to the higher civilian authority.

The Sups know what's going on in the community and they know how they want it to be run.

I'm holding my breath an keeping my fingers crossed for you guys.

[Harry Carry]

THIS is the reason we need a massive showing at the 11-18 meeting. Regardless of whether the Sheriff listens to those who gave her the job, the Supervisors are making CCW THE issue for the 2010 election by even tackling this.

[mhael]

Good on supervisor Norby. I appreciate that he has listened to us and is trying to make a change.


Trevor

[OIS]

Originally Posted by RickD6023

That is an awesome discussion item for the Board and just by being placed on the agenda sends a message to the appointed Sheriff that she must tow the line.

However, I would not be surprised to next read that the Sheriff's attorney challenges the agenda item as being in violation of State law as a Board of Supervisors usurping the authority to issue CCW which is the exclusive responsibility of the Sheriff as assigned by the State. I hope that I'm wrong.

I wonder if the Board of Supervisors operates under special rules in addition to "Robert's Rules of Order." I assume the Board is elected rather than appointed. Which prompts the parliamentary question: Can a Non Board member [The Sheriff or the Sheriff's attorney] challenge a Board of Supervisor's agenda item?

[Dan M.]

Originally Posted by OCRancher

This is starting to look like a real win. Let's keep it rolling, folks!!!!!!!!!

And for Mr. Norma Rae, I can't imagine you in tight jeans...

Even worse, the part where she's skinny-dipping with the union guy.

[RickD6023]

Originally Posted by OIS

I wonder if the Board of Supervisors operates under special rules in addition to "Robert's Rules of Order." I assume the Board is elected rather than appointed. Which prompts the parliamentary question: Can a Non Board member [The Sheriff or the Sheriff's attorney] challenge a Board of Supervisor's agenda item?

Her challenge has no authority at the BOS meeting but only in the courts. First she gets a TRS and then is heard in court. Ultimately, the court would decide whether or not the agenda item would stand. This is an ugly scenario.

I am not as familiar with OC as I am with SBC. In SBC, the Board has no authority over other elected officials such as the Sheriff beyond the purse strings of the annual budget. Even though the OC sheriff is appointed by the Board, she is still serving in an elected position. While the Board has the authority to fill a vacant elected position by appointment their authority ends there. Once appointed to fulfill the remaining term of her elected predecessor she is for all intent and purposes "elected" and can only be removed by the electorate - the citizens of OC.

For example, right now in SBC there is an issue regarding the Assessor and the BOS. The BOS has "invited" the Assessor to respond to their concerns on his reported illegal drug use/addiction and his (mis)management of the department. The Assessor is thumbing his nose at the Board because the Board has no authority over him.

IMHO, based on my knowledge of SBC, the OC BOS has the right to express their concerns about the manner in which the sheriff is (mis)managing her department (and I applaud Supv Norby for his efforts) but they cannot dictate to her how to run her department.

I hope I'm wrong when it comes to OC.

[Harry Carry]

They cannot make her do anything. But the mere act of standing up for lawful CCW licensees is HUGE. Where else in California has this happened?

CCW is now THE issue for the 2010 election. You don't run on a MORE restrictive platform and have any chance.

[octrustatty]

Originally Posted by RickD6023

Even though the OC sheriff is appointed by the Board, she is still serving in an elected position. While the Board has the authority to fill a vacant elected position by appointment their authority ends there. Once appointed to fulfill the remaining term of her elected predecessor she is for all intent and purposes "elected" and can only be removed by the electorate - the citizens of OC.

Still, getting this resolution passed should lower the cost of waging a RECALL CAMPAIGN, and raise its chance of succeeding.