A test took place July 29 in downtown Riverside.
It didn’t involve pens, paper or classrooms. Instead, the test at the daylong Riverside County Board of Supervisors meeting measured the Riverside Sheriffs’ Association’s influence.
In the end, the union representing thousands of sheriff’s deputies won. Three supervisors — Supervisor Yxstian Gutierrez left the meeting early — declined to advance Supervisor Jose Medina’s plan for greater oversight of the county Sheriff’s Department.
For frustrated criminal justice reform advocates, the supervisors’ actions, or lack thereof, prove money — specifically, what’s spent by the union on campaign donations to supervisors — speaks louder than the will of the people.
“I would say yes,” Vonya Quarles, whose reform-minded group, Starting Over Strong, is part of the Riverside Sheriff Accountability Coalition, said when asked if she thought the union’s money swayed supervisors’ July 29 votes. “Even if it isn’t an actual conflict, there’s the appearance of a conflict.”
Most of the 80 or so people who spoke July 29 wanted more oversight, Quarles said.
“But the current supervisors can’t hear beyond (the union),” she said. “That’s who they’re listening to, and that’s who they’re taking orders (from).”
Union leaders declined comment.
A Southern California News Group analysis of campaign finance data shows the union donated more than $600,000 going back to 2016 to Gutierrez and the three supervisors — Karen Spiegel, Chuck Washington and V. Manuel Perez — who did not move the oversight plan forward.
Headquartered in Riverside, the union, with roots dating to the 1940s, represents jail corrections officers and district attorney’s investigators along with rank-and-file deputies and others in law enforcement.
Historically, it’s been a major player in local politics, with candidates for city council, Congress and other elected offices eager to get the union’s endorsement and bolster their public safety messaging.
With that endorsement comes sizable campaign donations. The union also isn’t afraid to attack unfavored candidates — in 2016, it paid for mailers detailing the personal financial struggles of a then-Murrieta councilmember running for supervisor.
Calls for reform
In recent years, activists and groups critical of the criminal justice system focused their ire on the Sheriff’s Department and its elected leader — Sheriff Chad Bianco, an outspoken law-and-order conservative running for governor in 2026.
Bianco’s department, one of the largest law enforcement agencies in California and the nation, is facing an ongoing civil rights probe stemming from a double-digit number of deaths in county jails — 19 alone in 2022 — that triggered a wave of lawsuits from dead inmates’ families.
Bianco, a Republican, said the investigation by the Democrat-led California attorney general’s office is politically motivated.
Last month, the nonprofit Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice reported the department cleared just 9.2% of its violent crimes and property offenses — last among California’s 57 sheriff-led departments — during Bianco’s first six years in office. Bianco called the report a “political hit piece from a disingenuous source and contributors.”
Advocates for reform also want to split the coroner’s office from the sheriff, arguing there’s a conflict of interest when the coroner investigates jail inmate deaths or fatalities involving law enforcement. Supervisors rejected the split in March 2024, saying it was too costly and measures already exist to independently review law enforcement-related deaths.
Elected in 2024 to an open seat, Medina promised on the campaign trail to seek more oversight of the Sheriff’s Department, which gets one of the biggest slices of the county budget pie.
-
Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco looks back towards the crowd as he addresses the Board of Supervisors on July 29. Bianco described a plan to bolster oversight of his department as a political power grab. (File photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
1 of 3
Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco looks back towards the crowd as he addresses the Board of Supervisors on July 29. Bianco described a plan to bolster oversight of his department as a political power grab. (File photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
Expand
Besides overseeing the sheriff’s funding, the county’s five supervisors authorize settlements — sometimes amounting to millions of dollars — to end lawsuits alleging brutality or other misconduct by deputies and corrections officers.
Medina’s plan would have set up an ad hoc committee to look at creating a sheriff’s oversight committee and inspector general. The oversight panel would have advised supervisors and the sheriff while lacking authority to manage or discipline anyone.
Power grab?
At the July 29 meeting, Bianco’s critics urged supervisors to rein him in. “Unfortunately, this Sheriff’s Department, under the leadership of Sheriff Chad Bianco, has destroyed much of the general public’s trust,” Murrieta progressive activist Jen Reeves told the board.
“His lack of compassion and humanity are evident in how he handles not only his inmates, but the families of those who have been harmed at the hands of his deputies,” Reeves said.
Bianco and the union argued Medina’s proposal was a political power grab. “For the first time in our history of Riverside County, divisive partisan politics have officially entered Riverside County government,” Bianco said July 29.
Union Vice President Jose Santos told supervisors giving an ad hoc panel “of activists with subpoena powers over department personnel, no safeguards for potential litigation and due process, or subject matter expertise is not reform.
“It’s a liability,” Santos said, inviting legal challenges and “conflicting investigation outcomes.”
Medina’s ad hoc committee proposal died for lack of a second.
“I’m not prepared to support this ad hoc committee, at this point,” Supervisor Chuck Washington said at the time. “I need more dialogue. I need more dialogue with community members. I need to understand more deeply.”
Political player
Last year, the union spent more than $273,000 on donations and campaign mailers backing former state Sen. Richard Roth, Medina’s opponent in the 2024 supervisors’ race. Medina edged his fellow Democrat, 51% to 49%, in the November general election.
The union also played a pivotal role in launching Bianco’s political career. After losing the 2014 sheriff’s race, Bianco beat incumbent Stan Sniff in 2018 with the help of more than $982,000 in union contributions — far and away Bianco’s largest source of campaign funds.
Since then, the union has been a frequent Bianco donor. It endorsed him for governor and gave at least $25,000 to his gubernatorial campaign.
In county politics, the union is but one big-spending donor. Developers, wealthy entrepreneurs and other county employee unions, among others, routinely write five-figure checks to supervisors, who typically raise close to $1 million for reelection.
That said, there’s been a steady money stream flowing from the sheriff’s union to supervisors’ campaign accounts. Leading the way is Perez, who got at least $126,000 from the union since 2018.
Not far behind is Washington, who received at least $125,500 in union money in the past eight years. The union also spent roughly $43,000 on pro-Washington mailers in 2016.
Gutierrez, first elected to the board in 2022, got at least $120,000 in union donations going back to 2021. And the union has donated at least $23,000 since 2019 to Spiegel, a Republican who endorsed Bianco for governor.
The union also gave $500 to Medina on June 13, records show.
In an emailed statement, Gutierrez said he was “proud to have the endorsement of rank-and-file law enforcement officers, which includes the Riverside Sheriffs’ Association. I’m equally proud to have the support of groups who represent local firefighters, nurses, librarians, and construction workers.”
He added: “I’ve been fortunate to serve my community in public office for more than a decade – including as a councilmember, mayor, and supervisor. I’ve been a strong advocate for public safety at every level of office, and that’s why I’m supported by so many of Riverside County’s law enforcement and firefighter organizations.”
In another emailed statement, Spiegel said she makes it “a priority to meet with all sides to hear their perspectives — regardless of whether they are financial supporters.”
“My decisions are always guided by what I believe is in the best interest of my constituents and the county as a whole,” she added.
Washington and Perez did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
‘Money talks’
There’s been a $20,000 cap on what donors can give to candidates for county elected offices, with that limit rising to $21,218 this year.
However, those limits aren’t set in stone. They vanish for everyone in a race if one candidate spends more than $20,000 of their own money on their campaign.
The caps also lift if a candidate transfers more than $20,000 from another campaign account, or if a candidate benefits from $20,000 or more in independent expenditures — money spent by committees not controlled by a candidate.
The sheriff’s union’s donations are the product of “a political system by design that revolves around money” thanks to Supreme Court rulings “that allow unlimited money in our politics,” said Sean McMorris, transparency, ethics and accountability program manager for Common Cause California, a nonprofit fighting for government accountability.
“At the end of the day, money talks in our politics,” McMorris said. “Politicians need it to keep their jobs and wealthy individuals use that to their advantage.”
Most of the time “there’s no explicit quid pro quo” behind big donations, McMorris said. But those receiving campaign donations “also know that even by accepting it, they’re portraying this image that they agree with the views of the entities and individuals that give them that money.”
A politician has “an understanding (that) logically, if I side with them on policy issues, I can assume that that gravy train is going to continue for me. I can also assume that they are a reliable person or entity that I can go to when I do need money because I’ve established this relationship,” McMorris said.
“Meaningful contribution limits” can limit big donors’ influence, McMorris said, and force politicians to get money and support from a broader base. Higher limits, like $25,000 donation caps, are “ridiculous” and still buy a lot of influence, he added.
Quarles, the accountability coalition representative, is encouraged that Medina overcame the sheriff’s union to win the supervisor’s race.
“That does indicate that something’s different about where people’s thoughts and ideas are around sheriff accountability,” she said.
Originally Published:
