On Feb. 3, state auditors determined that 185 individuals died in the Sheriff’s Department care from 2006 through 2020 — more than in nearly any other county in the state. As a lieutenant colonel in charge of four jails in the Anbar province in Iraq, I made sure that my Marines and sailors provided a comprehensive medical screening of every detainee upon admission. Individuals who needed medical or mental health care were transported to a hospital for treatment, not booked into jail or left on the streets to die. I protected detainees in a war-zone jail, with rudimentary resources. I will safeguard the incarcerated in one of the largest counties in America.

San Diegans deserve safety, honesty and transparency. I will align the department’s priorities with the concerns of the community — providing information to the appropriate oversight boards and the public when visibility is paramount. When the people see that their sheriff is committed to transparency, trust and collaboration are sure to follow. As the new sheriff, I will be just what we need: an experienced, fair, dedicated leader.

In the meantime, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors must appoint an interim sheriff who must immediately take responsibility for the audit results. Otherwise, the county Sheriff’s Department will be ruled by an already overeager and overreaching state Legislature, as recommended by the audit.

I have provided strong leadership in times of crisis as the top legal adviser to two former San Diego police chiefs, including Shelley Zimmerman, who has endorsed me. I have helped craft proactive policies, encouraging transparency at every step of the way. I will ensure our policies align with best practices, not just the minimum standards (as seemed good enough at times in the sheriff’s audit response), when performing intake health evaluations, providing follow-up medical and mental health care, conducting safety checks, and correcting the other deficiencies identified in the auditor’s report. And I will enlist the top professionals, both inside and outside the department, to accomplish this.

I am committed to safeguarding public safety in every community. In my nine years of patrolling the streets as a San Diego police officer, I took the time to know and help families and small businesses in the high-crime Mid-City beats that I patrolled. Not everyone in San Diego County has the luxury of positive and proactive law enforcement support. Victims deserve a strong law enforcement response. Victims deserve to be heard. Victims deserve to be informed. Some communities currently suffer from increased violence. As sheriff, I will not delay essential support from underserved neighborhoods in need of reducing violent crime — equal protection is not just a constitutional issue, it’s a public safety issue.

According to the most recent reports on crime from the San Diego Association of Governments, violent crimes, including gang violence, have risen to heights that we haven’t seen in nearly a decade. Crime should be decreasing. As sheriff, I will make that a priority, and partner with every local agency, and state and federal partners, to root out the violent criminals who terrorize our neighborhoods.

I have 28 years of dedicated service to San Diego, patrolling the streets, giving legal advice to our local leaders, and upholding our laws in court. In my 30 years of faithful military service, I put my own life on the line to lead troops in battle. I cannot stand idly by when our county is in desperate need of leadership. A complete review and overhaul of the Sheriff’s Department is essential to fix our jails, support victims of crime and restore public safety in all our neighbors.

A leader not only stands with the community but also with the true heroes in law enforcement. I will never turn my back on the dedicated men and women who unselfishly place their lives on the line for us every day. I will stand shoulder to shoulder with our deputies as they protect you.

Former San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, San Diego Councilmember Chris Cate, Coronado Mayor Richard Bailey, Santee Mayor John Minto, El Cajon Mayor Bill Wells, former San Diego City Attorney Jan Goldsmith and the Republican Party of San Diego County have endorsed me. Please vote for John Hemmerling for sheriff on June 7. Visit johnhemmerlingforsheriff.com for more information.

Hemmerling is the chief prosecutor in the San Diego City Attorney’s Criminal and Community Justice Divisions. He is a retired Marine Corps Reserve colonel, a decorated Gulf and Iraq War veteran, a former San Diego police officer and a candidate for sheriff in the June 7 election.

I am John Hemmerling, the Assistant City Attorney and Chief Criminal Prosecutor at the city of San Diego, in charge of the Criminal and Community Justice Division. I am contacting you as a concerned citizen of San Diego County. I strongly oppose the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations (CDCR)’s plan for the early release of criminals.

Under the proposed regulations, CDCR seeks to reduce sentences already imposed by increasing credits awarded on those sentences. Violent offenders could have their conduct credit rate increased from 20% to 33%. “Non-violent second strikers” could see an increase from 50% to 66%. For example, on a 10-year sentence an individual could be released after having served three years and four months if the proposed regulations are adopted. Note that offenses characterized by CDCR as non-violent include offenders who were convicted of human trafficking and domestic violence, and those who have dangerous criminal histories of armed robbery and attempted murder. This means the victim of a violent crime who thought they were safe from an attacker for at least 20 years, for example, will now be looking over their shoulder in 10 years!

CDCR’s proposed changes are retroactive, meaning many felons will be eligible for release immediately.  Why make these changes now, when crime is on the rise in our communities? Why are we continually giving criminals avenues to continue terrorizing our neighborhoods? Why are we advocating more for criminals than victims?

We already afford those who have made a mistake in truly nonviolent offenses opportunities for rehabilitation and integration.  Perhaps that should be the focus, and maybe even enhanced, for the benefit of society. However, violent criminals, including many considered “non-violent” under CDCR’s narrow definition (including offenders who were convicted of human trafficking and domestic violence, and those who have dangerous criminal histories of armed robbery and attempted murder), only leave prison more violent – why would we let them out early?

The social justice agenda is overtaking common sense criminal justice. These early releases of criminals further threaten the safety of our communities and inflict additional suffering on the victims of crime.

Extending additional credits to inmates with serious and violent criminal histories is NOT in the interest of justice or the public’s safety. Opening the jailhouse doors years earlier than the sentence imposed by the judge who heard all the evidence and heard the victim’s pain, undermines our entire criminal justice system! That sentence should stand and not be altered after the fact beyond the credits already allowed under California law.

Public safety is the number one job of government. Those of us entrusted with protecting the community must put victims first, not criminals!

John Hemmerling is the San Diego City Attorney’s Chief Criminal Prosecutor; he is a retired Marine Corps Reserve Colonel; a decorated Gulf and Iraq War veteran; and a former San Diego Police Officer. He is endorsed by the California GOP and Republican Party of San Diego County for Sheriff. To support John, go to https://www.johnhemmerlingforsheriff.com/

SAN DIEGO, CA — Voters will help decide who should serve as the next sheriff of San Diego County in the June 7 primary election.

John Hemmerling, a chief criminal prosecutor, is among the seven candidates vying to replace retired Sheriff Bill Gore. Gore stepped down from the position in February after heading the San Diego County Sheriff's Department for 12 years.

The top two vote-getters in the primary will face off in the Nov. 8 election. 

John Hemmerling

Party Affiliation

Republican — Endorsed by the California GOP and the Republican Party of San Diego County

Family

Wife: Tess Hemmerling

Does anyone in your family work in politics or government?

My wife, Tess Hemmerling, is a Criminalist with the San Diego Police Department.

Education

Juris Doctor, University of San Diego School of Law

Occupation

CHIEF CRIMINAL PROSECUTOR: From 2015 - Present. I have been the Chief Criminal Prosecutor, leading the City of San Diego's Criminal and Community Justice Division. I oversee eight prosecutorial units with over 200-plus staff. The Division prosecutes over 18,000 criminal cases a year, as well as civil enforcement of code violations. Deputy City Attorney since 2002. I provided seven years of legal advice to the San Diego Police Department and became Chief Legal Counsel to two Chiefs of Police, including Shelley Zimmerman, who has endorsed me. I was assigned to the City Attorney's Crisis Response Team, which advises key City leaders during critical incidents at the City Emergency Operations Center.

Previous or Current Elected or Appointed Office

A LEADER WITH 30 YEARS OF HONORABLE SERVICE TO OUR COUNTRY: In my three decade military career, retiring as a Marine Corps Colonel, I held command at nearly every level, including active duty in the Gulf War and the War in Iraq. In my last mission in Iraq, I commanded an 800 Marine battalion, four military jails, and was responsible for support, security and stabilization missions in the Al Anbar Province. I was the Senior Marine Liaison to FEMA Region 9 for coordinating military support to local and state agencies in the time of disasters. Among my awards are a Bronze Star and Combat Action Ribbon.

SAN DIEGO POLICE OFFICER OF DISTINCTION: As a San Diego Police Officer for nine years, I patrolled the Eastern and Mid-City Divisions and was certified as a Field Training Officer, responsible for supervising and developing police academy trainees and graduates for duty as police officers. I also received numerous community commendations, a Commanding Officer's Citation and a Life Saving Citation.

Campaign website

Website

Facebook

Why are you seeking elective office?

TO SET A HIGHER STANDARD: The upcoming election for Sheriff is of vital importance to San Diego County. Crime is up on our streets and morale is down in our Sheriff's Department. There is an old saying that "a new broom sweeps clean." I will bring real change and strong leadership as your new Sheriff!

Leadership counts! Victims matter! We need fresh, new leadership for a real change in how we safeguard our neighborhoods, run our jails, treat victims of crime, and protect personal liberty (including the individual right to keep and bear arms).

That is why I have been endorsed by the California Republican Party, the Republican Party of San Diego County, former Mayor Kevin Faulconer, retired Police Chief Shelley Zimmerman, Councilman Chris Cate, Mayors Richard Bailey (Coronado), Bill Wells (El Cajon), John Minto (Santee), the San Diego Deputy City Attorney's Association, and San Diego Asian Americans for Equality.

What are the critical differences between you and the other candidates seeking this post?

I AM A LEADER ON MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES AND HOMELESSNESS: As Chief Criminal Prosecutor in San Diego, I have been a leader in criminal justice reform. Our Community Justice Initiative (CJI) is a post-plea program for low-level offenders, allowing cases to be dismissed by completing community service; participants gain access to education, job training and drug treatment. Our San Diego Misdemeanants At-Risk Track (SMART) program offers drug offenders social services, individualized treatment and housing placement. With SDPD, Prosecution and Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion Services (PLEADS) is a voluntary, pre-booking diversion program for individuals under the influence of drugs, who avoid prosecution and jail by agreeing to drug treatment.

I was the only sheriff's candidate who met with San Diego Asian Americans for Equality (SDAAFE) after the tragic shooting of Dr. Yan Li. While I cannot comment on a pending investigation, I pledged to institute de-escalation procedures to avoid mental health crises from spiraling out of control. San Diego County's Psychiatric Emergency Response Team (PERT) consists of licensed mental health clinicians paired with specially trained law enforcement officers and paramedics. PERT provides crisis resolution and proactive outreach to decrease hospitalization and incarceration. PERT must be fully funded and expanded to all shifts at all times — it needs to be the rule and not the exception.

SDAAFE President Joan Chen stated: "As Sheriff, John Hemmerling is committed to opening and maintaining a direct line of communication with the Asian American community as he strives to reduce violence and hate crimes in San Diego County. SDAAFE is proud to endorse Hemmerling for Sheriff."

If you are a challenger, in what way has the current board or officeholder failed the community (or district or constituency)

I WILL RESTORE LAW AND ORDER: According to the most recent SANDAG reports, violent crimes, including gang violence, have risen to heights that we haven't seen in many years. Crime should be decreasing. As sheriff, I will partner with every local agency, and state and federal partners, to root out the violent criminals who terrorize our neighborhoods.

I WILL INCREASE SERVICE TO UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES: Not everyone in San Diego County has the luxury of positive and proactive law enforcement support. Victims deserve a strong law enforcement response. Victims deserve to be heard, informed and protected. As sheriff, my ultimate goal will be protecting people's lives. I will ask: Which communities are most impacted by crime? Is there a trend? Are they receiving adequate support? Or are they neglected because they cannot afford the same level of staffing as other neighborhoods with more money? Failing to provide adequate law enforcement to underserved communities is just as inappropriate as over policing. Equal protection under the law is not only a constitutional right, it's often a matter of life or death!

Describe the other issues that define your campaign platform.

I STRONGLY SUPPORT THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND CCW'S: The Second Amendment is a guarantor of our freedom as Americans. Individuals have the right to keep and bear arms. Our elected officials must ensure that citizens are able to protect their homes and their families, free from governmental overreach. Sheriffs in California are, by statute, entrusted with the role of approval of personal carry permits (CCW's). My firm belief is that the "good cause" evaluation process must allow each individual to assess their own need for personal safety or self-defense. I will ensure there is a quick turnaround and direct the Sheriff's Office to issue concealed carry permits for all persons who meet the statutory requirements, including completing the required training and passing the background investigation.

I WILL PROTECT BORDER SECURITY: As Sheriff, my job will be to protect the people of San Diego County. I will not proactively work with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in the performance of their stated missions — that would distract from my priority of focusing on crime in our neighborhoods. At the same time, I will not impede the ability of ICE and CBP to enforce federal laws at our border. I will assist ICE and CBP in criminal law enforcement, on an emergency, mutual aid basis, just like any other law enforcement agency that requests assistance. I will take aggressive action against those who commit any crimes along our southern border. Notifications and transfers that are related to criminal violations of the law will be made in accordance with California state law. The release of information of all prisoners in the San Diego Sheriff's custody will be public information unless safety or security is specifically identified as a reason to withhold that information.

What accomplishments in your past would you cite as evidence you can handle this job?

ACCOMPLISHMENTS: I have devoted my life to protecting and serving the public in leadership positions as a decorated Marine Corps Colonel, San Diego Police Officer, and as Chief Criminal Prosecutor in the San Diego City Attorney's Criminal and Community Justice Division. My career spans 27 years of dedicated service to the City and 30 years of faithful military service. I have patrolled the streets, fought to protect our laws, and put my own life on the line to lead courageously in battle. Those who know me will attest that I am a person of action more than empty words. I lead with integrity and have the time-tested experience to set a new and higher standard for our Sheriff's Department.

The best advice ever shared with me was:

ALWAYS HAVE A PLAN TO GO ON THE OFFENSIVE: I retired from the Marines in 2014, after 30 years and two combat tours of duty in the Middle East. I learned combat leadership skills from legendary Gen. James "Mad Dog" Mattis, who later became a four-star general, head of U.S. Central Command and secretary of defense.

As a young Marine lieutenant during the Gulf War in 1990, I worked directly under Mattis on a daily basis for a year. At the time, then-Lt. Col. Mattis led a battalion of 800 Marines. My role was coordinating artillery and forward observation for Mattis.

Mattis already had quite a reputation as a hard-nosed Marine commander. I found him very passionate and demanding, but fair. I grew to respect him. Mattis was very much an "in the thick of things" frontline commander. We were the first to breach mines surrounding the oil fields, and we were under continuous fire.

The best piece of advice Mattis shared with me was, "Embrace compromise and compassion. Always be kind and inviting. But always have a plan to go on the offensive."

What else would you like voters to know about yourself and your positions?

I WILL PUT VICTIMS FIRST, NOT CRIMINALS: I strongly support efforts to reform Proposition 47. Prop 47 more than doubled the stolen goods threshold under which people could be charged for felony theft, from $450 to $950. And it practically decriminalized drug crimes, removing incentives for drug defendants to seek treatment through Drug Court.

Former San Diego Police Chief Shelley Zimmerman (who has endorsed my candidacy) called Prop 47 "a virtual get-out-of-jail-free card." I support changes to the theft limits, such as reducing the felony threshold to $400. I support mandatory treatment as an alternative to criminal charges for drugs. Without providing an incentive to accept meaningful drug rehabilitation, we perpetuate an endless cycle of 911 calls to police, paramedics and first responders, to the detriment of our communities.

I opposed Prop 57, which was supposed to give "non-violent" inmates a chance at early parole, because it included many convicted of violent crimes. Now the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) is doubling down. I wrote to CDCR: "I strongly oppose CDCR's plan for the early release of criminals. We already afford those who have made a mistake in truly nonviolent offenses opportunities for rehabilitation and integration. However, violent criminals, including many considered 'non-violent' under CDCR's narrow definition (including offenders who were convicted of human trafficking and domestic violence, and those who have dangerous criminal histories of armed robbery and attempted murder), only leave prison more violent. These early releases of criminals further threaten the safety of our communities and inflict additional suffering on the victims of crime."

Public safety is the number one job of government. Those of us entrusted with protecting the community must put victims first, not criminals!

Conventional wisdom holds in most cases the best candidates are attracted by those employers willing to pay the best to the best candidates. This may hold true until even these candidates delve into and learn the instant workplace dynamics may not fit their comfort levels, long term. How does such negative institutional knowledge get out there? Word of mouth from current staff, mostly. Even higher pay to those candidates thus enlightened may not in sufficient cases mitigate against applicants accepting on the front end that for the extra money they must thereafter tolerate an unsupportive, or negatively charged work environment. What things might make a law enforcement work environment so unattractive to new-hires that they will likely apply elsewhere or quickly move along even after having first made that initial risk/reward assessment? Similarly, what poor working conditions might likely drive tenured LE staff to start seeking employment elsewhere?

From early childhood, one quickly learns to recognize unfair experiences for what they are perceived to be. When a sibling even seemingly received what was perceived by the other as a larger scoop of ice cream, this inequity was summarily noted and processed, even if the perceived slight was not expressed verbally, or in other ways, that perception was still recorded as their reality. This is human nature.

What is the point of this foundation? Law enforcement candidates, applying to a particular department, soon learn by asking tenured staff, they can expect to be immediately thrown under the bus and/or summarily discarded by management whenever it is politically expedient for management to do so. Further inquiry may too divulge that this particular department’s practice in performing administrative appeals are -- in actual practice -- designed to short-shrift appellants of their due-process and other constitutional rights. Those applicants with any sense will not surprisingly refrain from wanting to join or to stay on such a department.

Today, law enforcement is riskier than ever out in the world for first-responders who must work the field. Their perceptions, as a group, or as individuals, should not be that their own admin is a bigger threat and far more hazardous to them and to their careers than are the violent felons they encounter in the streets. Again, perception is reality. Human factors cannot and should not be ignored by leadership. 

A good leader understands human factors and that human factors must be considered in all things. All humans playing at the game of life are unavoidably constrained and restrained by human factors. The best way to mitigate against, or to eliminate, staff’s and prospective staff’s fear of such unwanted disparate treatment is to make it the department leader's business and mission to treat ALL people fairly and equitably, every day, and in every way.

In summation, a good leader creates a working atmosphere that allows the work-force to love coming to work, that allows them to do their jobs with a focus on achieving worthwhile goals and not in just surviving the work day without being fired or charged with a crime or both just for doing their jobs.             

Implement regularly recurring meetings with first-line supervisors to promote trust and gain buy-in by making them part of the decision making force.

An argument can be made that first-line supervision is the most important rank in both the military and in law-enforcement. Why is that? Familiarity breeds either trust, or contempt. Assuming a good first-line supervisor, trust is more likely going to be the outcome and the desired takeaway of one's such frequent contact with the actual work force. Trust is essential to gaining buy-in from any work force. It is the first-line supervisor who has, if not daily, then at least, the most frequent contact with those who perform the organization's missions.

Given too, that the span-of-control for a first-line level supervisor is generally the tightest among the ranks of supervision, that means influence and information passed down from the first-line supervisor to their charges is less likely to be distorted due to the phenomenon of "telephone syndrome" wherein the original message is lost or skewed in the pass down through many people.

In theory, it would seem that were the head of a department to regularly meet with first-line supervisors -- both to inquire about field needs and to direct the head's expectations for activities from the field -- the information flow would be tightened and less prone to being lost in the translation when passed down through too many levels potentially having nefarious and self-serving reasons to act as information flow filters.

What about the affects of this on the well established practice of respecting and at all times and in all things properly utilizing the chain-of-command? The answer is that these are not necessarily competing interests. A better question might be why would those in the chain-of-command above the first level supervisor be fearful of their department head desiring to periodically meet with and have a direct line of  communication with first-level supervision?

Are line-level staff, who in many cases are at least somewhat distrusting, if not outright fearful of the brass, more apt to understand the need for a new procedure and buy into it when such direction is given and explained personally to them by their own, trusted supervisors?

Example:

The sergeant says to his or her team at briefing, "Henceforth, the policy will be that on cell checks, a deputy will pause at the door of every cell for a count of five. This change is necessary so there is no question later that you didn't take a sufficient  amount of time to look properly and thoroughly at an inmate on a cell check. This is for your protection. The sheriff wants you to be protected against false claims in this regard as much as possible as he well knows you are busily always engaged performing your many other duties one after another - if not concurrently. As you know, the cameras are recording your activities on cell checks. I know that the experienced of you think you can make the necessary observations of life in a cell without breaking stride so that you can get to your next task. However, the seconds you save there in order to make time to handle some other required task do not adequately protect you from jurors getting the wrong idea. The sheriff doesn't want to risk jurors substituting  your expertise in quickly making assessments of this sort, with criminal negligence on your part."  The first-line supervisor will be immediately available to all affected personnel to explain why this change was necessary and to field questions from all of those affected.

In no way should this change in delivering the message be interpreted  to say that ignorance of the policy is no longer NOT an excuse, rather it is to stress that we can do these crucial information exchanges better by being more attuned to how best to get the wanted performance we want from either a verbal or a written policy transmitted from the top to the bottom with as few misinterpretations picked up along the way as possible.

When first-line supervisors on a department meet regularly with the chief or sheriff to discuss the department's work, what could possibly be the downside of them being on the same page for the public? Similarly, what is the downside for the department if the department head routinely discusses with the sergeants the state of affairs of the various bureaus, divisions, and units they are assigned to supervise?  

Historically, first-line peace officer supervision is given an eighty-hour course of instruction as is minimally required by P.O.S.T. within the first year they are appointed. The sheriff's department doesn't have a training sergeant program per se for the newly appointed sergeants. They generally get a walk through with a local sergeant or by the local lieutenant and are given the basics of what is minimally required before being put to work -- without all of the knowledge they need to proceed -- but with all of the responsibility that goes with operating in the position of sergeant.

Killing two birds: Training the trainer has long been a concept and a practice in policing. Wouldn't it be simple to create a position for senior sergeants, akin to a Training Officer, but for sergeants? A five-percent pay raise for designated Training Officers at the deputy level is already available, or could easily be adjusted to apply here. Were there to be such a "Training Sergeant" assigned to each sheriff's facility, on a split-shift that overlapped the other two, the quality of local, first-line supervision could immediately be raised several orders of magnitude over what exists currently simply by creating the supervisor consistency that would create among sergeants even between shifts and facilities,

It is not unusual for shifts at even the same facility to have different "working" policies because sergeants have had to wing it in terms of learning the ropes of being the sergeant at "their" facility, on "their" shift. This looseness adds unneeded and unwanted ambiguity and confusion, especially for overtime deputies, for sure. These unnecessary vagaries serve only to fuel misunderstandings of what exactly was expected of line-staff by admin. The solution has always been there. It just takes a leader who solves problems and who knows how to think outside the box to have fleshed it out.

   .      

§ 25655.  The sheriff of a county may issue a concealed carry license to a person upon proof of all of the following:

(1) The applicant is of good moral character.

(2) Good cause exists for issuance of the license.

(3) The applicant is a resident of the county or a city within the county, or the applicant’s principal place of employment or business is in the county or a city within the county and the applicant spends a substantial period of time in that place of employment or business.

(4) The applicant has completed a course of training as described in Section 26165.

A county sheriff ostensibly is empowered by law to publish his or her definition of that which constitutes "Good Cause." As your sheriff, it would be my intention to rewrite the current definition of "Good Cause" to be more inclusive of the otherwise eligible constituency who reside in this county.