Sheriff Carl DuBois
Biography of Sheriff Carl E. DuBois
Accomplishments in first term
News
Upcoming events
On the campaign trail
News archive
Photo gallery
Endorsements for Sheriff Carl DuBois
Affiliations
Resource links
Contact information
Join our mailing list
Make a donation
Return to home page
 
Press Release

November 22, 2002

A telling tale of two sheriffs
Bigger remains oblivious to the bitter end.

Monday offered Orange County residents a microcosm of what has been wrong with their Sheriff's Office and why there will be a new sheriff come Jan. 1.

On Monday, lame-duck Sheriff Frank Bigger, who was soundly defeated in his reelection bid, appointed a new jail administrator. The current administrator, Undersheriff John Thompson, has apparently been ill and Bigger said he felt the jail needed someone on hand to keep it running smoothly.

But – with Bigger there always seems to be a but – the sheriff neglected to tell the county executive or county legislators what he had done. This lack of attention to detail has been standard for Bigger, who showed disdain for those elected officials whenever they questioned him about a series of problems involving his office.

But a 1979 act of the legislature requires that it approve the appointment of any new jail administrator. And a protocol that has been in practice since 1980 requires the sheriff to consult with the county executive on the qualifications of candidates for the job before making any appointment.

Bigger ignored both. On top of that, as an official who is leaving office in a little more than a month, he has no business appointing anyone to one of the key positions in his department in the first place.

As it turned out, Bigger had a meeting with County Executive Ed Diana and the appointment was quickly rescinded.

At roughly the same time this was happening, the man who defeated Bigger in a Republican primary, Carl DuBois, announced that anyone who had received a so-called "courtesy badge" from Bigger had 60 days to turn it in without any legal consequences. After that, DuBois said, police agencies would be asked to confiscate any badges that might be flashed – say at a traffic stop – and take any official action they deem necessary. A not-so-thinly veiled warning.

This is in stark contrast to Bigger's half-hearted requests for people to return the badges. He's not even sure how many badges were issued or how many have been returned. Nor does he think they are a big deal.

But DuBois and other officials see them as a liability that exposes the county to all sorts of legal problems if the badges are used inappropriately. Beyond that, it suggests there is a separate class of people who get special treatment from law enforcement agencies. Even if that's not the case, it appears to be so and that isn't good.

If Bigger had shown the same courtesy to elected officials and others with whom he had to work as he did to the select group to whom he issued these phony badges, he might still be sheriff on Jan. 1, 2003.

While campaigning for the post, DuBois promised a new era of integrity in the office when he takes over. The courtesy badges may not be a big issue in the grand scheme of shaking things up, but they are a perfect symbol of the old being replaced by the new.

That's why DuBois, not Bigger, gets to name the new jail administrator come January.