Tim Steller's column: Nanos' suspension of his opponent stinks of politics

It’s time to elect a Pima County sheriff.

You know what that means, right?

It’s time for Sheriff Chris Nanos, a Democrat, to lash out against his opponents and critics, taking legal and employment action, launching investigations and otherwise tarnishing them however possible.

On Monday, Nanos’ administration put his opponent, Republican Lt. Heather Lappin, on administrative leave for election activities that the department said crossed a line. It involved off-duty deputies dressing in clothes that looked like their duty uniforms, standing at busy intersections, carrying signs that said, “Deputies don’t want Nanos.”

A photo of the deputies was posted on Lappin’s Facebook page, which was the basis of her original offense, apparently.

On Tuesday, Lappin, who supervises intake at the jail, turned in her badge and gun. Later, Nanos’ department expanded the scope of their allegations. They alleged Lappin “colluded with a journalist to facilitate payment to an inmate in exchange for a news story.”

They said they started looking into this incident, which involves reporter John Washington of the online Arizona Luminaria, after the sign-carrying episode. In a statement, Luminaria executive Irene Fischler McKisson said the outlet "does not and would never pay for sources, interviews or information." She also noted that Washington has been covering "injustices" at the jail as well as the sheriff's race. 

The target of Nanos' allegation, Washington, is useful in that he has aggressively and critically covered deaths at the jail. The timing of the discovery of supposed collusion is also quite the coincidence.

Another convenient coincidence: On leave, Lappin is required to stay home during her working hours, which means she can’t be out campaigning during those hours, even though she’s not doing anything for the department. She also was told not to talk about the investigation into her.

Politically, Nanos is using his power to handcuff Lappin.

If we hadn’t seen Nanos’ behavior before, we might be alarmed about his accusations against Lappin and others. But this is a script the sheriff has followed before.

In 2016, Nanos had been appointed sheriff and was running for election the first time. Just days after Sgt. Terry Staten filed papers to run for sheriff in May, Nanos suspended him without pay. He cited county rules, and then-county administrator Chuck Huckelberry backed him up.

The county rules at the time required suspension only if the employee’s election activities prevented the employee from performing his or her duties, or if “the election activities adversely affect the operation of the department.”

Back to homepage

Subscriber Login

Keep reading with a digital access subscription.

Subscribe now

Huckelberry’s explanation at the time was that there would be an adverse effect on the department because Staten would presumably campaign against the “policy and management direction” of Nanos’ administration.

Well, yeah! That’s why you run for election. Those rules, by the way, are no longer in effect.

That same year, 2016, then-Sgt. Kevin Kubitskey accused Nanos of assaulting him by poking Kubitskey’s chest and slapping his arm during a heated discussion after a union question-and-answer session. The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department was called in to investigate and chose not to pursue charges.

However, the county human resources department did investigate and found that Nanos was responsible for bullying Kubitskey. Once again, county administration came to Nanos’ rescue: deputy county administrator Tom Burke and Huckelberry decided that the investigation was biased against Nanos.

Nanos lost that 2016 election to Republican Mark Napier, so he wasn’t in office in 2020 to use the department’s powers against opponents.

But he’s back to his old tricks this year. Beyond Lappin, Nanos also put Sgt. Aaron Cross, the head of a deputies' union that opposes Nanos, on leave.

While this suspension also smells of politics, it may be more easily justified than Lappin’s. Cross was one of the deputies who wore clothing that matched deputies’ uniforms, even though they were not uniforms and had no badges or insignia, while waving signs.

Wearing a uniform while engaging in campaigning would have been a clear violation. But I know people who saw them and thought they were in uniform. So, there may be an arguable case against Cross and others who dressed like him.

All of this only reinforces the reputation Nanos has earned of being an authoritarian boss who retaliates against dissenters. I wrote about this in a column published Sept. 21 and heard more anecdotes after publication, of people who suffered consequences for crossing him.

Nanos told me at the time that what people thought was retaliation were really cases of his administration moving people around into jobs to fill needed roles or offer opportunities to other officers. He noted that he had even promoted some people who worked against his candidacy.

Maybe some of that is true, but the pattern here is also unmissable. It’s an authoritarian effort to hobble opponents before they can even get to an election.

While Republicans are rightfully crying foul about Nanos’ abuse of power in this case, they ought to think a little deeper about the ramifications of this position. It’s the same type of abuse, but at a much smaller scale, that Donald Trump has promised if he is elected president.

This can’t be reconciled. If you oppose Nanos’ abuses of power, bullying and retaliation, a position I have grown into especially with this latest episode, then you can’t also support Trump. The behavior is the same and unacceptable in both cases.