To the editor: Since taking office in December 2018, Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva has shown extremely poor judgment. He reinstated Deputy Caren Carl Mandoyan, who had been fired in 2016 for allegedly grabbing a female colleague by the neck and trying to break into her home. Last week, the chief county accountant notified Mandoyan that he will no longer be paid and must turn in his gun and badge. Villanueva is in the process of attempting to roll back some of the progressive policies initiated by his predecessor Jim McDonnell regarding deputy treatment of county jail inmates. The mistreatment of inmates was a huge scandal that ended the career of former Sheriff Lee Baca. These actions send a terrible message to the department and display poor judgment. Villanueva is not qualified to lead the Sheriff’s Department, and it is time to initiate a recall before he does more damage. Advertisement Richard Z. Fond, Sherman Oaks .. To the editor: As someone who supported Villanueva for sheriff and persuaded several others to do the same, believing he was the more progressive candidate, I am appalled by his performance to date. Villanueva needs to wise up and clean up his act fast. If he doesn’t, I’ll be one of the first people to start circulating a recall petition. Wendy James, Burbank .. To the editor: An L.A. Times editorial frames the Mandoyan controversy between the Board of Supervisors and the sheriff as being over whether Villanueva has the authority to rehire a deputy. Rather, the issue is whether the sheriff has the authority to hire a former deputy who was fired for conduct that would disqualify him from being hired initially. Advertisement Mandoyan had a complete administrative hearing concerning the conduct underlying his dismissal and was determined to be unqualified for his job. In the law, that finding is res judicata on the issue of Mandoyan’s fitness for the position and is binding on the sheriff, whose authority to run his office does not extend to appointing unqualified deputies. Ronald Magnuson, Tucson The writer is a retired attorney and former prosecutor for the State Bar of California. Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook<doc-sep>New leaders of organizations often find themselves pitted against entrenched bureaucratic factions that predate their time. The leaders can be elected or appointed ones, or for that matter could have seized power by brute force. The factions they must contend with can be actively malign ones, the truly deep state of some badly brave new world — but they can also be made up of true believers in the organization’s original charge who deftly work to protect the group’s credibility even when a new person’s nominally in charge. The latter was certainly the case this week when the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and the bureaucracies it controls took on a clearly bad personnel decision by newly elected L.A. County Sheriff Alex Villanueva. The county sued in Superior Court to challenge Villanueva’s reinstatement of former Deputy Caren Carl Mandoyan, who was fired in 2016 by then-Sheriff Jim McDonnell. He wasn’t let go for playing tiddlywinks on taxpayer time. A fellow deputy and former girlfriend alleged that after they stopped dating, Mandoyan grabbed her by the neck, tried to break into her home and sent her harassing text messages. He wasn’t prosecuted after the district attorney didn’t think she could get a conviction. But the firing was upheld by the county’s Civil Service Commission. And county Auditor-Controller John Naimo just ordered that Mandoyan will no longer be paid and must turn in his gun and badge. Related Articles The LAO, not politicians, should write ballot summaries and titles Expanding the child tax credit ignores historical precedent Will the backlash to school closures lead to education reform? California’s high gas tax set to go higher Say no to proposed tuition hike at UC Yes, the sheriff is independently elected (and yes, maybe that should change to appointment) and no, he does not answer as such to the supervisors. But two cheers for bureaucracy when elected leaders and county functionaries work so well together to step in and use the tools at their disposal to protect the people’s interest against capricious action by the sheriff. Whatever his friendship with and loyalty to Mandoyan — who worked as his driver during his upstart political campaign — Villanueva should have known what a terrible message his reinstatement would send in a time when society has properly pushed back against the harassment of women. The macho culture in the Sheriff’s Department had changed — and must continue to. Time’s up, sheriff.<doc-sep>Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva has long said that his decision to reinstate a deputy who had been fired in connection with domestic abuse and stalking allegations was part of a broader vision to rebuild the department. He believed Caren Carl Mandoyan, who volunteered on his campaign and acted as his personal driver, was a victim of a punitive culture in the prior regime that eroded deputy morale. Villanueva created a new “truth and reconciliation” panel to rectify what he claims were past mistakes made by the department that harmed deputies and the public. But documents reviewed by The Times show that Villanueva was working to rehire Mandoyan before he took office on Dec. 3 and at least a month before the reconciliation panel issued findings that Mandoyan’s misconduct did not merit discharge. The panel determined that Mandoyan acted irrationally by repeatedly tapping on a woman’s door and opening her window and that he brought “discredit to himself and the department,” but could not confirm allegations that he abused her, according to its Dec. 27 report. Villanueva has said that the panel’s conclusions are what led to Mandoyan’s reinstatement. The sheriff said at a news conference in January that he initiated the review into Mandoyan in the first week after taking office. Advertisement However, a Nov. 30 email from former Chief Alicia Ault, who headed the department’s professional standards division, says Villanueva made a “priority request” to reinstate Mandoyan and that it was in the hands of county counsel. “I have been told this request has been given to contract counsel and the County Counsel Litigation Attorneys to work together with Mr. Mandoyan’s attorney to achieve the goal of returning him to work,” said the email, sent to Villanueva’s incoming chief of staff, Lawrence Del Mese. DOCUMENT: Read the Nov. 30 email about Villanueva’s request about Mandoyan » County spokeswoman Lennie LaGuire said the county’s lawyers could not comment on the email, but the county counsel said in a court filing Tuesday that no one in that office approved of Mandoyan’s reinstatement. Ault could not be reached for comment. She stopped working for the department on Nov. 30, according to her email. Her email was provided by the Sheriff’s Department in response to a public records request from The Times. The email has heightened criticism from some county supervisors, who have questioned the legitimacy of the truth and reconciliation committee and the wisdom of hiring back deputies fired by previous administrations. “Doesn’t it make it obvious that the sheriff is willing to exceed his authority even before he legitimately has authority?” said Los Angeles County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas. “To orchestrate all of this prior to even having taken an oath and legitimately being the sheriff speaks volumes as to his mentality.” Ridley-Thomas said he didn’t understand why Villanueva took such extraordinary steps for a deputy whose behavior was “completely embarrassing at best and unlawful at worst.” Advertisement Villanueva did not respond to requests for comment. But he has defended Mandoyan in the past, saying the case against the deputy “failed on so many different levels” and was the result of a broken disciplinary process that brings false charges against deputies. Mandoyan’s attorney has denied he harassed or abused the woman. Sheriff’s Department spokeswoman Nicole Nishida did not directly respond to questions about Ault’s email and instead issued a previously published statement from Villanueva. “I can assure that an objective, honest, and fair assessment was conducted before reinstatement,” the statement said. Advertisement Ridley-Thomas and Supervisor Sheila Kuehl introduced a motion Tuesday that would initiate a review of whether the sheriff’s truth and reconciliation panel is legal and would instruct the sheriff to stop reevaluating past disciplinary actions for deputies. The board is expected to vote on the motion next week. Xavier Thompson, a member of the Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission, said the email from Ault indicates Villanueva has failed in his campaign promises to bring a new level of transparency and accountability to the department. “The fact that this process was well underway before the truth and reconciliation committee was put into place is a direct slap in the people’s face…. He did not seek our input. He did not seek our counsel. And he said he is committed to working with us,” said Thompson, who is the senior pastor at the Southern Saint Paul Church. Patti Giggans, chair of the oversight commission, said last month that Sheriff’s Department officials gave her and her colleagues few details about the truth and reconciliation panel and implied that it hadn’t been fully formed yet. Another oversight commissioner, Lael Rubin, called Villanueva’s effort to reinstate fired deputies “a rogue operation.” Advertisement A broader move by the supervisors to force Villanueva to undo Mandoyan’s reinstatement was stymied Wednesday when a judge declined to grant the county’s request for an injunction against the Sheriff’s Department. Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff said at a hearing that the county’s objections to Villanueva’s decision didn’t warrant an emergency order to intervene by removing Mandoyan from the job he resumed in December and requiring him to forfeit his badge, uniform and gun. Instead, the judge set a court hearing on the facts of the county’s objections for June, allowing Mandoyan to remain on duty. County officials and their attorney, Louis “Skip” Miller, say they won’t resume Mandoyan’s pay and benefits. Advertisement Mandoyan’s attorney, Greg Smith, has said his client will continue working without pay and will not turn in his badge or weapon. Steven Madison, an attorney representing Villanueva and the Sheriff’s Department in the court case, said there is no conflict presented by the timeline of the sheriff’s request to reinstate Mandoyan. “Clearly part of the sheriff’s whole campaign, which allowed him to win overwhelmingly, was one of reform and the fact that there had been terminations that were improper. The fact that he was looking into those matters after he had been elected and was preparing to take office is something I think the taxpayers would be grateful for,” Madison said. The truth and reconciliation panel, consisting of Assistant Sheriff Timothy Murakami, Chief Eliezer Vera and Chief Steven Gross, met on Dec. 21 to evaluate Mandoyan’s case, according to the panel’s report reviewed by The Times. Advertisement The panel found Mandoyan violated department policies for “general behavior” and “conduct toward others” for going to a fellow deputy’s house, repeatedly knocking on her patio door and opening her unlocked bathroom window after she told him several times to leave. But the panel said there was not enough evidence to support allegations made by the woman, who had dated Mandoyan, that he grabbed her neck, pushed her or stalked her, according to the report. Videos reviewed by The Times show Mandoyan on the balcony of the woman’s apartment appearing to use a metal tool to try to pry open her sliding patio door. Smith says Mandoyan got into a verbal argument with the woman but was not physically aggressive with her. The Times generally does not identify people who claim to be victims of domestic violence. Times staff writer Richard Winton contributed to this report.<doc-sep>
A judge on Wednesday declined to overturn Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva’s reinstatement of a deputy fired amid allegations of domestic violence, prolonging a stalemate with the Board of Supervisors over the decision. Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff said the county’s objections to Villanueva’s decision didn’t warrant an emergency order to intervene by removing the deputy, Caren Carl Mandoyan, from the job he resumed in December and requiring him to forfeit his badge, uniform and gun. Instead, the judge set a court hearing on the facts of the county’s objections for June. Mandoyan, who volunteered on Villanueva’s election campaign after being fired by Sheriff Jim McDonnell in 2016, will be allowed to remain on duty until then. “We are obviously buoyed by the fact that the court agreed with the sheriff,” said Steven G. Madison, an attorney representing Villanueva on behalf of the department. But county officials and their attorney, Louis “Skip” Miller, say they won’t resume Mandoyan’s pay and benefits. Those officials, who are working on behalf of the Board of Supervisors, said the judge’s ruling was a narrow one, focused on whether to immediately intervene in the case. Beckloff considered whether the court would issue an emergency order finding Mandoyan’s reinstatement unlawful — a determination that would require the county to show serious harm if the deputy were to remain on the job. That standard also required the county to show a likelihood of success in ultimately getting the court to overrule Villanueva. “We were surprised by the court’s ruling,” a statement issued by the county said. “The court’s ruling was not a ruling on the merits but a narrow ruling on the urgency for Mr. Mandoyan to surrender his gun and badge and county property.” From the beginning, Beckloff seemed unlikely to intervene, though. On Wednesday, the judge seemed to side with the argument that Villanueva had broad discretion over hiring decisions in his department as an elected official. The county countered that Villanueva technically didn’t have the power to reinstate Mandoyan. The county’s petition, filed Monday, asserts that Mandoyan is violating California law by acting as a law enforcement officer. The county determined that he is no longer an employee and directed him to return his badge and gun. Villanueva and the Sheriff’s Department, the county argued, are acting “contrary to their duties” to comply with the county charter by not retrieving Mandoyan’s equipment and credentials, threatening public safetnd exposing the county to liability. “There is great urgency,” Miller said. “We can’t have somebody out with the mantle of a peace officer who is not a peace officer. The judge disagreed, saying a resolution wasn’t needed immediately. A key issue going forward could be the definition of Villanueva’s decision to restore Mandoyan as a deputy despite his firing after a fellow deputy accused him of domestic abuse. Villanueva’s attorneys argued that the sheriff had authority over personnel decisions in his department, and that rehiring the deputy — who remained certified as a peace officer — was allowed. The county hadn’t prepared for that argument, instead focusing on evidence that Mandoyan had been “reinstated” — a process they say should have been overseen by the county’s personnel director and, by extension, the Board of Supervisors. A memo to Sheriff’s Department commanders in January said that an internal group created by Villanueva had recommended the “rescindment of the discharge” and a 12-day suspension for Mandoyan. “l am requesting approval to reinstate Deputy Carl Mandoyan,” Eliezer Vera, chief of the central patrol division, wrote in the memo. The county also claims that the sheriff and the department lacked authority to enter a separate legal settlement with Mandoyan absent input from county counsel. Villanueva and the deputy disagree with that, saying county lawyers didn’t object to their agreement. The escalation of the issue to a court case increases the tension between the Board of Supervisors, a five-member elected body that controls a $30-billion county budget, and the sheriff, who ousted McDonnell in last year’s election and has sought to assert his own authority over personnel decisions. In an extraordinary public upbraiding in late January, the supervisors sharply questioned the sheriff’s goal of establishing a “truth and reconciliation” panel to review past disciplinary actions against department employees. Villanueva has argued that the existing process is flawed and has led to unfair terminations.