The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) has faced scrutiny for misallocating funds related to a class-action settlement intended to address racial profiling. Among notable expenses, the office allocated more than $7,000 on cable TV subscriptions, an $11,000 golf cart, and $1.5 million on office renovations in Phoenix.
The settlement stemmed from a 2013 federal ruling that found former Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s department had violated the rights of Latino drivers. This led to mandated reforms, including tracking traffic stops for racial bias, appointing more investigators, and employing a monitor. Sheriff Jerry Sheridan, since taking office, and Republican supervisors have called for the settlement’s conclusion, referencing the high costs of compliance, while disparities in traffic stops persist.
An audit requested by the court, along with a review by Arizona Luminaria and ProPublica, revealed that a significant portion of the $226 million attributed to the settlement was misallocated. Only $63 million was rightfully linked to the court’s orders. Misattributed expenses, like $310,000 for travel and professional development, were common. One deputy attended National Police Week in Washington, D.C., costing over $5,000, unrelated to settlement requirements.
The county Board of Supervisors received criticism for lacking proper oversight. The board’s rare questioning of expenses led to a situation where millions were misallocated, undermining the credibility of the reforms. U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow’s ruling highlighted racial disparities in traffic stops. The county has spent $353 million related to the settlement, including millions on irrelevant items.
Republican supervisors, including Thomas Galvin and Kate Brophy McGee, defended their budgeting, arguing nothing breaks state or federal laws. They expressed frustration that scrutiny over finances exceeded the original lawsuit goals. Supervisors claimed Hispanic residents were unaffected by expenditure allocation, ignoring core concerns about racial profiling eradication.
Sheriff Sheridan dismissed findings of the audit covering prior administration and maintained that staffing costs primarily drive expenditures related to the settlement. The sheriff’s office had purchased numerous body cameras from a local company, Axon, but bought more than necessary according to court requirements. Additionally, purchasing Tasers bundled with cameras and charging them to the settlement was unsupported by a court mandate.
Expenses like an $11,000 golf cart were justified as necessary for transporting employees, but audits questioned their necessity and relation to the settlement. The Professional Standards Bureau’s separate housing from MCSO headquarters revealed offices in a Phoenix high-rise, going against cost-efficient recommendations. Financial mismanagement from 2014 to 2024 resulted in around $144 million in personnel costs wrongly attributed to the settlement.
Auditors criticized ongoing accounting practices as potentially misleading taxpayers further into unnecessary spending. Despite tight court orders, the sheriff’s office charges unrelated expenses, including patrol vehicles and car washes, to the settlement. Republican supervisors argue federal oversight infringes upon local jurisdiction.
Public finance experts emphasize the importance of accountability from county boards to taxpayers. Any disagreements with the audit should prompt another assessment rather than defensiveness. Critics like Democrat Steve Gallardo focused debate on achieving unbiased policing and compliance, with court oversight ensuring adherence to Melendres case requirements.
Finally, Democratic Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox reflected on historical spending issues similar to the current case, highlighting past allegations where funds were improperly used for jail funds to pay deputies. Despite their incidents, changes were made to prevent future occurrences, though challenges seem to remain.