A newly proposed state law would let local elected officials across all 58 California counties strip control of jails from sheriffs and shift operations to civilian authority.
If it becomes law, AB 2257 could further exacerbate tensions between Santa Barbara County Sheriff Bill Brown and the board of supervisors who earlier this month questioned law enforcement overtime costs—following public scrutiny in recent months and years focused on jail budget overruns and inmate deaths described as preventable.
Introduced by state Assemblymember Gregg Hart, whose District 37 spans the majority of Santa Barbara County, the new legislation gives localities the ability to “evaluate and pursue a structure that better serves the community,” he said, adding it would restore flexibility counties had until the early 1990s.
“California’s county jails are in crisis,” Hart said in a statement. “Jail deaths are at record highs. People with mental illness languish without adequate care. Staffing shortages persist, while financial mismanagement threatens essential public services. Counties deserve the authority to ensure their jail systems are safe, constitutional and fiscally responsible.”
Approval of the bill would hand a majority of Santa Barbara’s five county supervisors a powerful tool to dramatically reshape how the Main Jail on the South Coast and the Northern Branch Jail in Santa Maria function.
“I can see the motivation for this type of legislation,” said Second District Supervisor Laura Capps, who welcomed the proposal. “I respect what Assemblymember Hart is trying to do.”
Calling the proposal misguided and non-collaborative, Brown said he opposes it.
“There are reasons why sheriffs run the jail systems,” Brown said in an op-ed distributed to local media. “It’s because sheriffs and their staffs have the experience, the knowledge and the legal authority to run those jails in the most efficient and effective ways possible.
“Rather than setting the stage to restructure who runs the jails, the focus of any new legislation should be centered on ensuring that California’s jails receive adequate funding and suitable tools to provide proper staffing, security and robust rehabilitative programming,” Brown said.
Since 1993, sheriffs across California by law have had “sole and exclusive authority” to operate county jails, with one exception. Napa County at the time was allowed to keep the structure it had in place. To this day, its jail system is run by a corrections director appointed by Napa County supervisors.
When he announced the bill, Hart cited several concerns specific to Santa Barbara jail operations, and he referenced a Feb. 10 hearing in which Santa Barbara supervisors scrutinized an audit showing Sheriff’s Office payroll costs rose from $74.2 million in fiscal year 2020-21 to more than $100 million in fiscal year 2024-25.
During that time, overtime costs jumped from more than $8 million to $20.4 million. Overtime as a percentage of salary costs in that same span nearly doubled from 11.4 percent to more than 21 percent, according to county auditors.
In April, supervisors narrowly approved a more than $165 million plan to add 384 beds to the Northern Branch jail, which opened in 2022 with 376 beds—and when completed cost more than originally expected. More recently, supervisors signaled they might scale back the expansion in part to reduce costs.
In June, the Santa Barbara Grand Jury issued several reports finding deficient intake screening, insufficient medical care, and other systemic issues led to preventable inmate deaths.
Amid these challenges, some officials have expressed frustration that while the county pays for jail facilities and law enforcement, supervisors have limited say in how the Sheriff’s Office spends its appropriations.
Hart echoed that frustration: “With their policymaking authority ending at the jail door, boards of supervisors are put in the position of writing blank checks while jail issues persist. Reintroducing local choice will encourage collaboration and accountability. If a sheriff-run model is serving the community well, it can continue. If not—and particularly in the face of longstanding issues—a board of supervisors should have the authority to evaluate and pursue a structure that better serves the community.”
With a change in law, sheriffs would be incentivized to take seriously the concerns of boards of supervisors, rather than rebuke their oversight efforts, Hart said. “Good governance requires real accountability.”
Brown said California sheriffs are already subject to ample oversight.
“Contrary to Hart’s assertions, there are already robust accountability measures in place for elected sheriffs,” he said in his op-ed. “They are held accountable by the governor, the attorney general, the grand jury, the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC), the federal, state and local courts, by the boards of supervisors who control their budgets, and by the ultimate authority—the voters who elect them to office. As such, they receive far more scrutiny and oversight than most other appointed or elected officials.”
