New Maricopa County Sheriff Russ Skinner says politics shouldn't drive the office
Download mp3 (14.61 MB)Newly appointed Maricopa County Sheriff Russ Skinner announced Tuesday he will run for the office in November — and he’ll do it as Democrat. This despite the fact that he has been a longtime Republican. He changed his affiliation to replace former sheriff Paul Penzone, a Democrat, earlier this month.
Skinner said he wasn’t sure he would run for the position to begin with, but in his first press conference on Tuesday, he announced his intentions. He told the press he’s honored to run the department and that it doesn’t matter what political party he belongs to. He doesn’t think sheriff should be a political job.
But this is the office that was long led by Joe Arpaio, the so-called “America’s toughest sheriff,” and the office is still under the eye of a court-appointed monitor and several court orders as a result of Arpaio’s time in office.
The Show sat down with Skinner after his press conference to talk more about all of this. He’s a more than 30-year veteran of the sheriff’s office, and he served as Penzone’s chief deputy until Penzone left the position early, citing the ongoing court orders on his way out.
Skinner said he was a little shocked when he heard the news.
Full interview
RUSS SKINNER: I was at a point in my career that, you know, I could have retired at that point. But then I looked around and saw some of the faces that — as he disclosed this information — the staff that were shocked, but also just kind of uneasy of what’s the future hold? What’s the future bring? Uncertainty, I guess, is the best word to put it.
And then I also got a lot of outpouring from texts and phone calls, not only from internal staff members, but other law enforcement agencies, colleagues out there, community members, family members. And I soon realized the right thing to do is probably step up and and start going forward with this.
LAUREN GILGER: Let me ask you about what you learned from Paul Penzone to begin with. Working directly under him and in the time that he was there in which you’re under this court order, etc.. What did you learn?
SKINNER: Yeah, obviously I learned a lot. I mean, I was not in executive leadership before that. I was a captain coming in, and he promoted me right away to a deputy chief position. And so there was a learning curve there. And I’m not going to pit previous leadership, current leadership, future leadership. Everybody has a different style of that.
But he provided me an opportunity, at least, to grow in those roles. And actually I was on a pretty progressive and fast pace. I mean, there’s things that he’ll tell you that he and I didn’t agree with. But at the end of the day, he was the sheriff, and we made sure that that was the message delivered, but also that we were doing it for the right reasons to mitigate liability for the agencies, to hold those accountable and to make sure that we were being progressive in our decision making.
And things. I feel — I don’t know, maybe the community can decide and the agency can decide — but I think things are moving on the right path. And now for somebody from within, internal in the agency to now take on the role, again, I have different leadership styles or maybe things that I do differently. But I think I have at least hopefully the ability to move it forward.
GILGER: So what did you learn as someone in this department during the time of Joe Arpaio? Which was controversial, I would say: a lot of national attention, a lot of media attention, a lot of court activity. What was that like for you and from the perspective you had at the time?
SKINNER: I think early on, he had some progressive measures. I don’t know that that started to percolate till later on in his tenure in office. I wasn’t directly impacted or aware of a lot of the issues, but it really did hit me full force in October 2013 when the federal court order was issued on the agency. And then I got a very strong wind of knowledge on that.
As an employee, I had to do what needed to be done as long as it was ethically and morally correct. And I continued to follow those measures. Now, we have a few court orders which, you know, provides remedies, requirements and reform. We’re making sure they’re being carried out.
Nobody wants a federal court order of an agency. I mean, you want to be able to do your own thing and do it correctly and do it constitutionally. We’re still correcting some of those you know, what they found was to be illegal. And we’re going to make sure we’re on the right course to move forward.
GILGER: I want to ask you more about the court order in a moment, but let me ask you one more question about Arpaio. What do you think his legacy was for this department? Do you feel like it’s still hanging over the department in some ways?
SKINNER: You know, I don’t think so. I mean, everybody, I guess, makes a mark within their agency, especially as an elected official. I think there’s some that may feel in the community that it’s still good. They may be hollering his name, I don’t know. And then there’s others that know that the impact that we’re dealing with is something that changed our environment, especially some of the reforms.
Again, maybe good for the agency because we got ahead of some of the issues that I think all law enforcement needed to change and reform upon. And we’re seeing that. But I think the impact that people look back on is, yes, we have federal oversight now. And nobody wants that. It’s not a want. It’s not a desire. But it was what’s needed, and we’re living with that. And we’ll continue to make sure that we’re abiding by the requirements of that.
GILGER: So let me ask you about that, because your predecessor was not secretive about the reason he stepped down, and not being able to do what he wanted to do with this office is part of the reason he left. What’s your view on that? Do you see an end, a timeline, a way to kind of resolve this?
SKINNER: Well, that’s my hope and desire. Obviously, being involved with a court order for 10 years. We were hoping it wouldn’t take that long, but it is a very complex order. Obviously, there’s been other issues where it’s additional court orders or revisions of it have come forward relative to some of the reform that the judge saw during the lawsuit.
My goal and hope is, yes, that we continue forward to get at least compliance with that so we can assert full and effective compliance, hopefully with a portion of it, and we can focus on the other areas that we still need to work on, or at some point that we we obtain that and that we’re self-sustaining that. Because I guess, you know, the bottom line is we have to show self sustainment that these things are occurring and that they’re occurring regularly for three years, that we maintain that level of compliance.
So it’s going to be a work in progress. And there is a lot of complexity, there’s a lot of discussion. And I hope to bring to the table that open communication, whether it’s agreed upon or disagreed upon, that we’re working forward with the right steps for our staff and for this community.
GILGER: As we talk about the legacy of Joe Arpaio, I think it’s worth talking about his legacy in the Latino community here and how there have been many efforts since then to try to rebuild trust with that community. Where do you think the office stands on that? Are there things you would like to do in terms of communicating or reaching out to that community in any way?
SKINNER: Yeah, And again, I’ve been in executive leadership for the last seven years for this agency. So I can say without a doubt, maybe reflect on what does this agency look like now versus issues that may have obviously arose back then.
I think we can show a progressive path forward. I certainly hope the Latino community is willing and able to continue to open those conversations up if there are issues that are still impacting them or that they feel, or even perceptions of the agency.
I think a lot of it now is I think the two categories are perception and trust. Oviously we’re not doing any of the immigration roundups, the sweeps. All of that stuff has been enjoined. The agency is working to build those community relationships and bonds out there. But if there are areas that we can work together to move forward, I sure hope that we do.
GILGER: One of the concerns from that community in recent years at least, has been the 287G program, allowing immigration officers into the jails. Will you continue that?
SKINNER: So our jail facilities are multi-functional, facilities multi-jurisdictional. We provide opportunities for over 27 different agencies to utilize that facility. Just because it says MCSO on it doesn’t mean I can pick out an agency and say, “Oh, you can’t come into our facility.”
They are federal. We are state. We don’t enforce federal law. We provide space for them just as we do Phoenix PD, just as we do other agencies, if they have booking wagons, for a safe and secure environment to do their job.
And what I’d say is we’re not in the immigration business. We’re not into enforcing federal law. And if that's the issues, I would say have that community reach out to the DOJ. If they feel that immigration and Border Patrol or ICE officers are off, if there’s different levels that they would like to have taken or they have concerns, bring it to those agencies.
Again, we’re just providing a facility, the county is providing a facility for people to do their job safely and securely. And that means I have to be partners with all these agencies. And I’m not going to single out anybody from doing their job. We’re not the ones doing that enforcement effort.
GILGER: Last question for you is a forward-looking one sort of about the election that you’re about to be running in here. You had to switch to a Democratic affiliation to take this position from Paul Penzone. You were a registered Republican before. And you’ve talked about the need for the office to be nonpartisan. And I wanted to hear a little bit more from you on that. And if you think it’s, I guess, possible in the political environment that we live in and heading into an election this year.
SKINNER: Political party doesn’t change the person. And I will say look back at the last seven years and, you know, obviously Paul Penzone ran the office, but I also had a part in the operations of it and certainly take the accountability. And moving forward, I’ll do things maybe a little differently.
But I will say that there is nothing that should be political and law enforcement. Law enforcement should be unbiased and evenly keeled in delivery of services. You will continue to get that with me. I changed my party, and again, that’s just because of the need to align, by requirement, at the time that Paul Penzone stated that he was not running.
If you look at some of the other candidates have to switch their party as well, as well as Paul Penzone prior to running for office. That should show that politics don’t or should not drive this agency. And I am committed to making sure that I run the ethical path and make sure that we provide the best leadership and services out there despite political affiliation.
