Audit Reveals Misallocated Funds in Racial Profiling Settlement

Misuse of Funds in Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office

An audit has uncovered significant misallocation of funds by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) in relation to a class-action settlement aimed at addressing racial profiling. The settlement was a consequence of a 2013 federal ruling against the department under then-Sheriff Joe Arpaio for constitutional violations against Latino drivers.

Examples of questionable expenses include more than $7,000 on cable TV subscriptions, $11,000 on a golf cart, $1.5 million on office renovations, and $1.7 million on Tasers. These were part of over $200 million billed to the settlement.

Calls for Ending Court Oversight

Despite ongoing racial disparities, Sheriff Jerry Sheridan and Republican members of the Board of Supervisors argue that the cost of compliance with court orders should lead to the settlement’s conclusion. Since 2013, Maricopa County has allocated $353 million for settlement-related spending, but audits show extensive misappropriation.

Audit Findings

The audit focused on $226 million billed over a 10-year period and found that 72% of these expenses were improperly attributed to the settlement. Only $63 million was appropriate. The audit team, with vast experience in public finance, pointed out that exaggerated reform costs hurt the court’s credibility.

This mischaracterization misleads the public on reform efforts’ costs and questions MCSO’s credibility, transparency, and truthfulness.

Board of Supervisors’ Oversight Lacking

The audit highlighted the Board of Supervisors as providing no substantial oversight or processes to verify fund usage, despite approving budgets with escalating costs. They rarely challenged expenses during budget hearings.

Debbie Lesko stated that the oversight was overly costly and accused the judge of moving goalposts. County attorneys filed a motion to end oversight, arguing it was no longer necessary.

Misallocated Spending Examples

Public finance experts stress the importance of accountability, urging for further audits. The audit identified many expenditures unrelated to the settlement, including travel expenses for unrelated training and professional development, totaling $310,000. Decisions such as the purchase of 950 body cameras exceeded court requirements.

The sheriff’s office also inaccurately charged personnel expenses, including 209 positions improperly or partially attributed to Snow’s orders.

Sheriff’s Office Response and Ongoing Compliance

Sheridan justified these expenses as necessary for staffing related to court orders, yet audits indicate continued misattribution practices. Sheridan and financial officers dismissed audit findings, defending the settlement expenses.

Future Implications

The sheriff’s office, with unresolved compliance issues, continues to face judicial oversight. The ACLU of Arizona opposes ending oversight until full compliance is achieved, while some supervisors argue for financial independence from court scrutiny.

Past practices indicate the necessity for long-term reform and accountability in the sheriff’s office spending and oversight processes.