The Mexican border, Sheriff Mark Napier told a congressional committee, has long been in crisis.
“We have had a border crisis for all 32 years that I’ve been in Pima County,” he testified. “The nuances and the elements of the crisis have evolved over time, but nonetheless we’ve had a crisis all this while.”
Laid out on April 30, 2019, it was a perspective that played perfectly into the Trumpian world view. But as always, Napier, a Republican, gave it a personal twist that Democrats and moderates might appreciate.
“The lack of a secure border is an undeniable humanitarian crisis. The humanitarian crisis is compelling and should bring leaders of both parties together to find solutions.”
As Napier runs for reelection to an office that he wrested from decadeslong Democratic control in 2016, he knows he needs to appeal to some Democrats in a county dominated by them. His tenure has probably offered enough moderate pragmatism for some to vote for him.
But it’s unclear if the fact that Democrats and some independents are voting in disgust against President Trump will affect down-ballot Republicans like Napier.
The partisan disadvantage for Napier is clear. As of this month, registered Democrats are 40.5% of Pima County’s electorate, to 29.3% for Republicans and 29.2% for others.
Chris Nanos, the Democrat Napier unseated in 2016, is in turn challenging Napier this year, and thinks the sheriff’s moderation is a sham.
“He tries to ride the fence whichever way it will work for him. That’s what he’s done,” Nanos said.
Napier acknowledges he likely needs some Democratic votes to win, but says he thinks he’s earned it. Besides, he says, public safety shouldn’t be a partisan pursuit.
That belief was tested in March 2018 when a routine reapproval of a relatively small federal grant, $1.4 million, came up for Board of Supervisors approval. To everyone’s apparent surprise, the opposition of the late Supervisor Richard Elías to accepting Operation Stonegarden money spread to the other two Democratic supervisors. A 3-2 majority rejected the grant.
Elías opposed accepting the money because it’s meant to help local departments work with federal agencies like the Border Patrol. Under the Trump administration, he no longer wanted the coordination, even if it meant more money.
That took Napier aback, and he worked various angles to recover the money. He even agreed to remove Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers from the space they had at the jail.
In a Fox News interview after the vote, Napier asked, “What has changed? The only answer is, the current presidential administration. This is jeopardizing public safety for making a statement to our president and the current border policies.”
He received a temporary reversal, when Supervisor Ramon Valadez changed his vote, but the supervisors went on to reject the Stonegarden grant again, and it appears to be dead in Pima County. The Tucson Police Department stopped taking Stonegarden grants as well.
“How many times does he need to be told this community doesn’t want Stonegarden?” Nanos asked. “I don’t care politically where you’re at on this — the community has said it.”
The occasional interviews at Fox News have annoyed some Pima County liberals. But Napier notes that he has not turned down interviews based on the apparent political slant of the outlet. He’s also done interviews that have annoyed conservatives, with National Public Radio, the BBC, the New York Times.
“People tell me I shouldn’t talk to you,” Napier told me Friday. “If people ask for an interview from me, they get it.”
His appearances on big news outlets, in congressional hearings, and in a few White House events, though, sometimes have shown Napier seeming to go beyond his expertise.
Napier testified Sept. 29 before a congressional subcommittee investigating white supremacist infiltration into American law enforcement. He denied that racism is systemic in police agencies.
“During my three-decade career in law enforcement I have not found evidence to make me believe that racism or white supremacy is systemic in our profession,” Napier said.
His testimony contrasted with that of Heather Taylor, a recently retired detective sergeant in the St. Louis Metropolitan Police department. I contacted her Friday afternoon to ask her what she thought of Napier’s testimony.
“He’s obviously highly educated. He has credentials. But when you talk about lived experiences, that’s very different,” said Taylor, president of the Ethical Society of Police, an African-American-majority police union. “To deny that there is systemic racism in law enforcement is nonsense.”
Napier responded to nationwide calls for police reform this summer by releasing a plan in July that focuses on accountability, community engagement and transparency. The plan includes revising use-of-force standards, banning no-knock warrants, hiring new community-engagement specialists for mental health and similar calls, and establishing a citizen-review panel for use-of-force incidents.
“It is clear that law enforcement reform is both needed and desired by the community,” Napier said. “I looked at it and thought, let’s get in front of this.”
Napier has been credited for some of his efforts. Pima County’s head public defender, Joel Feinman, said Pima County jail management has done one of the best jobs in the country of protecting inmates and employees from COVID-19.
But Feinman noted that Napier hasn’t adopted the “deflection” program to steer people toward treatment after they are caught with small amounts of drugs. It’s a program the Tucson Police Department has been using.
“TPD has done an outstanding job implementing a deflection program,” Feinman said. “The sheriff has refused to implement this program.”
Napier said he’s willing to pursue changing the laws, but he’s following them as they are.
“Statutorily, the possession of hard narcotics is a felony,” he said. “I can’t in good conscience tell my deputies to ignore the law. Do we really want to empower the sheriff to decide what are good laws and what are bad laws?”
Nanos also noted the sheriff has been unwilling to outfit deputies with body cameras, something many departments in the area already do. Napier said it’s a matter of money — not the cost of the cameras, but the management of the system that runs them and stores the information.
“His story is, they’re very costly. It is,” Nanos said. But, “you prioritize things.”
Nanos was part of the old guard that ran the department for decades under former Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, but he has presented himself as the candidate for real reform this year. He has the baggage, though, of a scandal that occurred during his tenure, which led to the indictment and conviction of the number two official in the department for misuse of federal money.
But Napier says he thinks enough Democrats will vote for him.
“I really believe in the Democrats of Pima County,” the Republican sheriff said. “I know that seems gratuitous or whatever, but they elected me last time. Donald Trump was on the ticket last time.”
