County Issue: Misdemeanor Prosecution Policy

Citing budget problems, the Ventura County district attorney’s office is no longer prosecuting many misdemeanors, such as petty theft and vandalism cases. City and

police officials say this action not only sends the wrong message, but reduces fines that agencies receive when the cases are prosecuted. Is the D.A’s policy a good one?

* Michael D. Bradbury, Ventura County district attorney

It certainly wasn’t a good decision, but it was forced upon us because of inadequate funding. My staff of lawyers was cut from 24 to 15, and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that you can’t do what you used to with that kind of cut. I can’t think of any other agency that has sustained this kind of damage. We are here to fight crime, and we feel like we’ve just had our left arm cut off. Our ability to prosecute all misdemeanors in the past has helped us keep Ventura County safe. We have one of the best reputations of having a low crime rate, but if we lose a handle on controlling crime, we might end up like Los Angeles. We have been exploring possibilities that do not involve extra work by our office, but in the end, nothing will work except adequate funding. The misdemeanors that won’t be prosecuted are only those that don’t have a direct impact on public safety. Hopefully, at the next budget cycle, we will be able to remedy the situation and get the funds we need to hire our lawyers back and prosecute all misdemeanors.

* Kathy Jenks, Director, Animal Regulation Department

All the revenue that is generated by the citations we give out is divided between the city and the county. The D.A.’s decision to not prosecute misdemeanors means the city and county are going to lose money. My concern is the attitudes of people who are caught violating animal regulation laws. They read the paper and they know that they can get away with it now. They will just thumb their noses at us. I don’t question Bradbury’s ability to run his office, but he should have found other solutions to his budget problems. A blanket refusal to prosecute most misdemeanors is not right, and we need to take a serious look at the D.A.’s refusal to prosecute them. Many agencies had to take budget cuts, and we did it gracefully. We were willing to cut fat from the top rather than from the bottom--with the people. We will keep writing citations as we always have. It will be business as usual. Luckily, we have the option to write some of the violations as infractions and have them prosecuted without the D.A.’s involvement.

* Walt Adair, Santa Paula chief of police

The district attorney had no choice but to make a decision regarding his department’s budget problems. It was a difficult choice, but it was his responsibility. We, as are other police departments in the county, are not going to change our arrest procedures or policies because of his decision. We will still make arrests and issue citations, whether or not the cases are prosecuted. I know it is frustrating for my officers to make an arrest, then do all the paperwork, only to know that, when they’re done, nothing is going to come back from it. I have discussed the D.A.’s decision with my officers. They don’t necessarily like it, but they understand it. No matter what, we will find ways of enforcing the laws. We will continue to arrest people who violate the law and put them in jail. If those people choose not to show up in court because they think their case will not be prosecuted, then a warrant for their arrest will be issued.

* Jeff Price, Chief ranger, state Parks and Recreation Department in Ventura

The district attorney’s decision has impacted my department greatly. While his decision still allows us to protect the personal safety of park visitors, it no longer gives us a way to protect the parks from the people. My department’s primary mission is to protect the park’s structures and natural habitat-- this means keeping people from vandalizing property or taking too many clams from the ocean. I sympathize with Bradbury because he had to make a difficult decision. He had to do something. As a fellow administrator, I admire his ability to make a decision that will have the least amount of impact on public safety. Despite this setback, we may be able to invoke a little-known clause that will allow us to file our complaints as infractions. This way, a person will have to plead his case to a judge, and the D.A.’s office will not be involved--just like in traffic court. I would be handcuffed if it weren’t for this option, and my rangers and lifeguards would not be able to do their job.

* Robert Dahlstaedt, Newly appointed misdemeanor supervisor for the public defender’s office

It’s a terrible decision, and for all the wrong reasons. Bradbury is not prosecuting misdemeanors for political reasons and is attempting to convince the Ventura County Board of Supervisors that he needs more money. He has an extremely large staff and is not reallocating resources in his office. He is also wasting money and court time with his no-plea-bargaining position. In Los Angeles, a person who is arrested for having a low blood alcohol content, 0.08 or 0.09, is offered a chance to plea bargain. If he pleads guilty to a lesser charge, it goes on his permanent record, and he doesn’t go to court. Bradbury’s refusal to offer a plea bargain means that every case automatically goes to court, and this takes up time and money. Bradbury is taking a gamble, and it’s one that he will lose most of the time. By not prosecuting misdemeanors, both the county and the city lose money. Bradbury knows this, and he is punishing the county for not giving him money.