PHOENIX — There was a thread running through Maricopa County Sheriff Paul Penzone's surprising decision Monday to step down next January: The legacy of Joe Arpaio.
Penzone vented about the court-imposed burden he inherited from Arpaio, the six-term sheriff he booted out of office in 2016.
At one point, Penzone dared the court to sanction him for speaking out.
"I was told numerous times by my attorneys don't speak out against it, because you're going to upset the court and they're going to punish you for it," Penzone told reporters.
"Last time I checked, the First Amendment applies to me, too."
The Arpaio legacy stems from Federal Judge Murray Snow's landmark ruling a decade ago that Arpaio's deputies had racially profiled Latino drivers, violating their constitutional rights.
Snow's sweeping orders required Arpaio to change how the Sheriff's Office operated. A court-appointed monitor was hired to ensure he did.
The monitor is still on the job. So is Snow, overseeing progress on putting the reforms in place, 16 years after the so-called Melendres case was filed.
The Cost of Arpaio's Legacy
Arpaio's legacy can be measured in dollars.
Every three months for the last nine years, the court-appointed monitor - a former police chief named Robert Warshaw - has issued reports grading the Sheriff's Office's progress on meeting court-ordered reforms.
The latest report, issued in September, is 303 pages and breaks down the sheriff's progress on meeting 368 reforms.
"When I have more people investigating internal affairs and compliance issues than I do crimes in our community, something's wrong," Penzone said.
Last year, Snow found Penzone in contempt of court for not acting fast enough to close out investigations into alleged staff misconduct.
Penzone has appealed the ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
The cost of complying with the court orders over the last decade will soon surpass $300 million, according to data provided by Maricopa County.
County taxpayers foot the entire bill.
The largest single expense is $22.6 million, for the court-appointed monitor.
Is Court Monitor Still Needed?
Lydia Guzman, who was one of the leading Latino activists in the push to hold Arpaio accountable, questions whether the monitor is still needed.
"Looking at the way that it is now, with all of the tedious micromanaging, I'm starting to wonder if we really need the court monitor at this point," Guzman said in an interview Tuesday.
She noted that the U.S. Department of Justice and the ACLU were still involved in the case.
Guzman said she was an early supporter of installing a monitor to look over Arpaio's shoulder.
"I didn't think we could trust Arpaio," she said. "I didn't think that Arpaio was going to do the right thing."
There are no indications the court-appointed monitor is going away.
Guzman warns that could be a problem for the next sheriff, too.
"Whoever the new sheriff is has to be realistic, and go in knowing that this is going to be a tough, uphill battle," she said.
The court monitor's office did not respond to a request for comment. Neither did the ACLU of Arizona, whose lawyers are still associated with the case.
How New Sheriff Will Be Selected
Penzone's planned retirement in January - a year shy of two full terms in office - will create a vacancy that, under the law, must be filled by the Maricopa County Board.
Once Penzone formally resigns, the board will set up a process to appoint a new sheriff.
The Republican-controlled board typically vets applicants, then makes the appointment. There is no statutory timeline for making the appointment.
The new sheriff must be a registered Democrat, like Penzone. The officeholder will serve until a sheriff is elected in November 2024.
ARIZONA POLITICS
Get the latest Arizona political news on our 12News YouTube playlist here.