Tehama Sheriff Discloses State Role in Probe Following Supervisor Proposal

Sheriff's Office Collaborates with Attorney General in Ongoing Investigation

During a recent board meeting, Tehama County Supervisors were prepared to vote on a letter that would have requested the attorney general to take over an investigation led by the county's sheriff. However, a surprise announcement from Sheriff Dave Kain shifted the course of the discussion. Instead of asking the attorney general to assume control, the sheriff revealed that his office has already been working closely with the attorney general’s office for over a month on aspects of the criminal investigation.

“This collaboration reflects our office’s commitment to a thorough, impartial, and conflict-free review of the facts,” Kain stated during the meeting. He emphasized that this partnership is not only beneficial but also necessary for ensuring transparency and objectivity in the process.

Kain addressed the issue directly during public comment, where the proposed letter to the attorney general was discussed. The letter outlined allegations against Supervisor Pati Nolen regarding an alleged DUI, as well as the counterclaims she made. It concluded by suggesting that the sheriff was too biased to handle the case, prompting the need for the attorney general to step in. Kain strongly contested these claims, both personally and legally.

He cited California Government Code 25303, which outlines the responsibilities of the board of supervisors. According to the code, the board is responsible for overseeing the conduct of county officers, including the sheriff. However, it also clearly states that the board must not interfere with the independent investigative and prosecutorial functions of the sheriff or district attorney.

Kain clarified that the request for outside involvement could be unconstitutional based on the legal wording that emphasizes the independence of the sheriff's office. He argued that taking the investigation away from the office would violate this independence. Additionally, he revealed that the investigation is not being handled by him personally, but rather by Undersheriff Jeff Garrett, who reports his findings directly to the attorney general’s office.

The board then began discussing modifications to the letter, proposing that it ask the attorney general to assist the sheriff instead of taking over the investigation. Supervisor Tom Walker suggested rewriting the letter to reflect this change, but Supervisor Pati Nolen interrupted, stating that this was essentially what had been proposed earlier. She claimed the move was a waste of time and money.

As discussions continued, Nolen and Supervisor Rob Burroughs claimed they had never approved the initial request for state involvement. However, a review of the July 22nd meeting showed that both had voted in favor of the move. Despite this, the letter itself contained critical allegations against Nolen that had not yet been proven. It remains unclear whether Nolen and Burroughs were aware of the full content of the letter before voting.

Supervisor Matt Hansen addressed the interruptions, noting that Nolen was incorrect in her disagreement and that Burroughs might have experienced a lapse in memory. Before the final vote, Kain returned to clarify his previous request for outside counsel’s assistance. He explained that as the investigation progressed, it became clear that more than just potential criminal violations were involved. With County Counsel Margaret Long possibly being a witness to these violations, the sheriff could not rely on her for assistance.

Kain also mentioned that he was seeking up to $100,000 for the legal firm’s services, as the scope of the work was uncertain. The firm’s role would be to provide legal guidance on where certain violations should be reported and to help redact information so that the investigation could be released to the public once completed.

Kain ended his remarks with a strong commitment to transparency, assuring the board that the sheriff’s office is capable and willing to continue the investigation. He expressed his intention to keep working with the attorney general’s office and to seek their support in handling the findings.

The supervisors ultimately approved the modified letter, voting 3 to 2, with Nolen and Burroughs dissenting. In response to follow-up questions, Kain confirmed that the move would not alter how the investigation is conducted. He also revealed plans to file an appeal in court and to work with the law firm he hopes to engage. The Attorney General’s Office confirmed awareness of the situation and stated they would review any requests sent by the board.