County officials on Tuesday issued a letter in opposition to pending legislation by two Southern California Democrats that would remove the authority for Colusa County Sheriff to serve also as the coroner.
Currently, 48 of the 58 counties in California consolidate the duties of the county elected Sheriff with the duties of the coroner into a single office, which, for rural communities, saves taxpayers thousands of dollars a year, county officials said. The remaining counties have independent offices of the medical examiner or a coroner’s office that is separate from the Sheriff’s Office.
AB 1608, authored by Assembly members Akilah Weber (D-San Diego) and Mike Gipson (D-Carson) would result in Colusa County having to create yet another county “office” with another paid position that would have to be filled.
“It would require us to create a separate office with additional costs for a job that has about 50 cases a year that we need coroner services for,” said Chief Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler. “We believe the current model that we have with a combined sheriff and coroner makes sense for small rural counties.”
AB 1608, an unfunded police reform bill, stems from two bills, AB 1196 (Gipson) and AB 490 (Gipson), which the Governor signed after the deaths of George Floyd and Angelo Quinto while in law enforcement custody. AB 1196 bans law enforcement from using chokeholds, including carotid restraints. AB 490 prohibits law enforcement from using restraints that cause positional asphyxia, which results in a person being restrained not getting enough oxygen.
Gibson said the intent of AB 1608 is to create greater transparency in law enforcement.
According to a press release issued by Gipson in January, AB 1608 will serve as a building block to create complete transparency in determining the cause of death of an individual who dies in police custody, and give families the peace of mind that these investigations and processes are done righteously and fairly.
“This bill would ensure that death investigations are conducted objectively, reducing any perception that the investigative process could be influenced by other segments of the criminal justice system,” Gipson stated.
Tyler said that while the intent of the legislation is to ensure there are checks and balances in place whenever there are suspicious circumstances regarding a death, sometimes involving law enforcement, separating the two offices for that reason is not necessary.
In the case of Colusa County, contracts for coroner services, including transport, autopsy, and pathological services are vetted outside the Sheriff’s Office and then awarded by the Board of Supervisors as they go through the procurement process.
“We have the checks and balances in place already,” Tyler said.
In a letter to Gipson and Weber, Colusa County Sheriff Joe Garofalo strongly opposed separating the two offices, which most counties rely upon for operational and budgetary efficiency.
“By separating these offices, you will remove investigative efficiency and drastically increase county cost by requiring us to separate our coroner office,” Garofalo noted. “Existing law already allows counties to pursue a variety of models of consolidation or separation. This is a decision best left to the discretion of local officials.”
Chairman Merced Corona echoed Garofalo’s concern by noting, in a similar letter, that AB 1608 offers no financial support for expenditures of considerable local resources over the long-term, and its implementation would place a disproportionately high impact on the small jurisdictions for relatively limited benefit in return.
“Further, recruitment efforts for this type of need would be highly difficult, and likely unsuccessful, giving the known and already challenging shortage of forensic pathologists nationwide,” Corona stated.
AB 1608 passed the Assembly on May 16 by a vote of 44-20 and was introduced in the Senate on May 17. ■