“I will not be drug into the frivolous politics and bickering”: Sheriff Johnson Denies Crye’s Claim that He was Behind Shasta County’s New Media Policy
After facing community anger over a new county media policy, Kevin Crye said it’s not his place to question the Sheriff’s safety decisions. Sheriff Johnson says he had nothing to do with the County’s new policy.
Shasta County Sheriff Michael Johnson has issued a statement strongly contradicting Supervisor Kevin Crye’s claim at yesterday’s board meeting that a new county media policy came from him.
Last night, Crye, who previously said the County’s new policy was a group decision, changed his story, telling the public it was all the Sheriff’s idea.
“What the Sheriff says when it comes to public safety is . . . not my purview,” Crye told the public. “If the sheriff says this is what he wants to do to keep constituents, media, anybody else safe. That’s not my place.”
County CEO David Rickert, who was hired by the current Board majority, backed Crye’s claims last night, saying that the new policy was the result of the Sheriff’s instructions. CEO Rickert framed the policy as positive for the media because it provides the press with “an alternative option.”
When Supervisor Mary Rickert asked how the new policy was created, saying she knew nothing about it until the press release came out, Crye said “the Sheriff made that decision.” He told the public if they wanted more information they should, “Go ask the Sheriff.”
Shasta Scout did.
In a one-page response today, Johnson flatly denied Crye’s claim, saying he doesn’t make policy for the county administration or supervisors and he had nothing to do with creating the new media policy.
He said the policy actually complicates the Shasta County Sheriff’s Office safety plan in the case of a real emergency, writing that the new policy meant “the SCSO had to account for other safety considerations that could become a factor when implementing the safety protocol/process.”
The county’s media policy, which was released on July 26 and updated two days later, offers the press the option to use a separate “media room” to report from. It also says if they decide to report from the board chamber instead of the separate media room they’ll lose their press rights to remain in the room during the disruption.
Community member Benjamin Nowain said last night that he didn’t believe Crye’s claim that the media policy came from the Sheriff.
“Mr. Crye,” Nowain said, “I don’t buy that the Sheriff was solely behind this change. Myself and many others believe you are likely in charge of the changes . . . Pawning it off on the Sheriff does not fool anyone. The Sheriff doesn’t have purview over these board meetings.”
“The actions of this board go beyond maintaining order,” Nowain continued. “They are about silencing dissent and controlling the narrative.”
Nowain’s wife Jenny O’Connell Nowain was the individual who refused to leave the board chamber last week when the room was cleared. She was eventually removed by Shasta County Sheriff’s Officers who responded at County Counsel Joseph Larmour’s request and ticketed her for meeting disruption.
The press documented the entire process. Three days later the county’s new media policy was released.
Nathan Pinkney, a community member who has also previously been asked to leave the Board chambers, commented last night that the new policy appears to be retaliatory.
“Last week I watched a reporter . . . question the lieutenant from the Sheriff’s Department. And she asked him some hard-hitting questions . . . and he didn’t like it . . . But that’s the whole point of the media,” Pinkney said.
The nonprofit First Amendment Coalition sent a warning letter to the Board yesterday, saying the updated media policy is not consistent with California’s Brown Act or the Constitution’s First Amendment and that staff do not have jurisdiction to unilaterally come up with policies anyway.
In a statement supporting the importance of the freedom of the press to the workings of local government, FAC Legal Director David Loy and Advocacy Director Ginny LaRoe wrote:
“As events of last week demonstrated, when the Board recessed proceedings over purported disruptions, journalists are essential to keeping the community informed. By all accounts, during last week’s meeting, journalists performed an important public service by documenting the board’s two-hour recess, which included law enforcement removing a meeting attendee. Given that journalists serve as the eyes and ears of our communities, the county should be working to find ways to support, not interfere with, the press.”
Supervisor-elect Matt Plummer, who will take Supervisor Patrick Jones’ seat in January, shared a similar statement with Shasta Scout earlier this week.
“It’s unfortunate that the County has prioritized developing policies to more easily clear the chambers,” Plummer wrote, “rather than finding ways to address the root causes of the disturbances. I hope this is not an attempt by the Board to hide the disruptions from the public by limiting media access rather than doing the hard work of bringing us together.”
During yesterday’s meeting, some community members referred to the “media room” as a “press corral”, a “press ghetto” and a “fishbowl.” One community member questioned Crye’s claims that the new policy is meant to keep the media safe.
“To use safety . . . that is the dodge of people who are trying to take power that doesn’t belong to them,” he said.
Greg Lawson, who told the Board he’s the son of long-time former Record Searchlight journalist John Lawson, said his dad would be “proud to see the new breed of Shasta County community journalists . . . who are courageously trying to navigate the political climate this Board has fostered.”
Sheriff Johnson, who was not supported in his run for office by the Board majority, said he hopes moving forward, that those involved in meetings “can conduct themselves in a rational and respectful demeanor.”
Especially as the community is navigating the Park Fire, Johnson explained, he does “not have the luxury of pulling valuable resources from operations merely to deal with intolerable behaviors.”
“I won’t be drug into the frivolous politics and bickering,” he said.
Do you have a correction to this story? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.
Author
Comments (28)
Comments are closed.
Related Articles
Congressional District 2 hopefuls court Shasta voters ahead of June primary
Candidates for California’s District 2 congressional seat — which will represent Shasta under newly-drawn Prop. 50 lines — appeared in Redding for a forum last night. The audience questioned candidates about immigration, voting rights, the environment and how much time they’d spend in Shasta.
Documents show the Shasta Sheriff’s Office attempted to enter an agreement with ICE last year. Doing so would have violated state law
The sheriff’s office took actions to enter what’s known as a 287(g) agreement with ICE last May, but the process appears to have been halted. ICE’s 287(g) program, which gives local and state officers immigration enforcement authority, has been making national headlines.
After the resignations of three board members, Cascade Union Elementary School District gains a new one: Jackie LaBarbera
Following a dispute with the superintendent, the majority of CUESD board members resigned over the last week. Shasta County Office of Education Board President Michael Orlicky has appointed SCOE Board Vice President Jackie LaBarbera to fill one of the empty seats, ensuring a quorum.
What I do know is this: (1) Sheriff Johnson is a man of high integrity, (2) the Sheriff would never direct the county on how to manage meetings or the placement of the press, and (3) Supervisor Crye has been caught being far less than truthful on numerous occasions. Case closed.
Where’s Nick?
This Dog and Pony show circus cant get anymore corrupt, or can it…. Maybe the sheriff needs to invite himself to cry’s talk show and clear it up… who said what!!!!
Why wasn’t the whole board involved? My supervisor didn’t know about it until the “press” release.
Dixie: the First Amendment Coalition asked the same question.
Sheriff Johnson did not accuse Supervisor Crye of lying according to what I read in the letter. He just stated he did not want to get into a tug of war between the Supervisors, their policies and the people who come to the meetings with their own agenda and then create chaos and disruption. We do not know what was discussed between them when they met. We know that from now on there is a policy in place for those people who can not conduct themselves appropriately in a public meeting.
Uh…no one ever said that Sheriff Johnson accused of him of lying.
But Crye DID say that the sheriff was behind this policy and to ask the sheriff about it. The same policy that was never even voted on by the board, but given as a mandate.
The sheriff clearly said he had nothing to do with it.
Conclusion: Crye did not tell the truth, aka lied.
The day of reckoning is near…The first week in October you’ll get your ballot in the mail, please fill it out, after studying it carefully, and mail it in, free postage and make Shasta County Great Again ! Mary Rickert-YES. Shasta Co. Ballot Measures-NO !
Crye will be left talking to himself. Jones will be walking around his wanna-be gun range talking to himself…and Kelstrom is still wanting to buy that barber shop in Cottonwood.
It seems like you are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill. This all seems very straight forward. If people in attendance of a public meeting are incapable of conducting themselves in a suitable manner, they will be asked to leave. If the disruptive behavior continues, everyone in the audience will be asked to leave. If members of the press wish to stay they need to be seated in the media room. If they choose not to sit in the media room they will not be allowed to stay in the meeting. You have a choice. Why should law enforcement be put in a position of having to carry an adult out of a room in the first place? Moreover, why should law enforcement be distracted from carrying said adult, by a news reporter asking them questions while they are dealing with an adult who is throwing a temper tantrum, in a public meeting?
Concerned: Hmmmm if expecting our public officials to follow the law is making a mountain out of a molehill . . . . then, yes.
Concerned: Despite your feelings about this, the fact is that Crye said the sheriff was the one behind it, and any questions about it should be directed to the sheriff.
The sheriff had nothing to do with this “policy”.
“Policy” that was never even put to a vote, but was given to the public as a mandate. From a person who claims that they are all about transparency.
The whole way this came about is problematic at best.
I guess if someone has really broken a law then we should be seeing some arrests very soon. In the meantime, let’s hope that members of the audience and members of the press who attend these meetings with their own agenda will hopefully find a way to behave appropriately in a public meeting. There are, as I understand it, some really important concerns going on behind the scenes in more than one county department. People resigning because of questionable actions, people resigning because they don’t want to be a part of questionable actions, etc. etc.
Concerned, or Kevin rather? You should just comment using your name. So little transparency and lack ownership of your ideologue. Your words mean nothing now that your actions over these months have spoken so tremendously anti-American and without the love of the Christ you profess to worship. Throwing stale politician deflection, touting of corruption in departments as a reply to a question of your own integrity, is an insult that we tire of paying you for. I’d use my name but I’m related to a county employee that has to care for family and the community and am fearful of the toxic leadership you impugn down into the departments. The real reason folks are leaving is the vitriolic rhetoric and Stalin era like fear of the consequences of not cowering to your and Patrick’s nonsense. It wasn’t a trend you started, but one you have taken the torch for and amplified. Do us and your children (if they are to continue live here ) a favor and leave office, give us a chance to grow in a thriving beautiful place. You should be championing our safety and ratifying emergency response measures for needed resources. Instead you couldn’t even show your face to the sheriff who called your BS thereby neglecting your duty and defrauding the taxpayers of any wages collected for that day. A PRA of that day’s activity and time card may be in order.
By the by this in no way excuses the vitriol and childish behavior of the constituents you serve, but YOU serve THEM. If you don’t want to serve them anymore, I understand, but honor the role and step down.
Are you one of the people who is unable to control your behavior in the meetings? I ask because your writing is also out of control. Here is a quote from you: “Do us and your children (if they are to continue live here ) a favor and leave office. . .” This sounds like a threat.
Not a threat at all. A parenthetical thought if you or Kevin were considering the condition of our county for your own children much less ours to live in if they don’t move to greener pastures. Consider what your political power will reign over weaponizing chaos and vitriol with the damage those methods leave behind.
Lyin Crye caught again with egg on his face! Every word that comes out of his mouth is a lie! He can’t even keep his stories straight! He the lead idiot with his 2 side kick idiots fo nothing but lie and cost this county money!
Honestly, it doesn’t matter who suggested it, it’s been done and it’s best for the county. Media members of Shasta County who have an agenda should not be in with the general public behind the glass in the baby room is where you all need to be !! I have a nice day
Honestly, Crye got caught in a lie.
But okay, the media…blah blah blah…
Damn shame he had to rescind the order today, all because the Sheriff wouldn’t “Play Ball” and fall on his sword.
And now the media get to be right where they should be.
Sorry (not) you lost this one.
Couldn’t you simply look on the new policy as to who created it instead of throwing around accusations?
Accusations? Are you for real??
If you would have simply read the article, you would see that Crye claimed it was from the sheriff and to ask the sheriff about it. Crye’s own words
Turns out it wasn’t from the sheriff at all and the sheriff had to release a public response about it.
Crye. Did. Not. Tell. The. Truth.
So yeah… accusations…sure thing.
Dodi: It’s interesting you ask. The First Amendment Coalition says the way the policy was created is also problematic. Normally a policy would be created by a vote of the Board making it very easy to track who created it. In this case, it wasn’t.
Then I would think the policy would be invalid then. Just saying.
One effect of physically isolating journalists and other reporters from the public during open meetings is to deprive the press from “taking the temperature of the room,” both by sight and ear. Putting them all together into a closed box in the rear of chambers means that they will only see the backside of attendees, will not hear comments, and they will not be available to people who may have information to share with the press. Restricting press access during public meetings does not enhance public trust in the elected officials who made this decision.
Crye lied again. No surprise here.
Should’ve recalled him…
More lies from the current county board. Shasta is the worst run county in the state. It will be so until local district voters pull their collective heads out of the sand (or somewhere else) and stop voting for “tear it down” candidates that only want the role of County Supervisor to feather their own nests and wield power. The voters in these districts are absolutely to blame for voting in someone like Kevin Crye…and then of course allowing him to stay in that seat and not recalling him.
Sounds like cry baby Crye is throwing the sheriff under the bus. Not a good idea.
This sounds more like a “he said-she said” type of situation. For some reason, I think I’ll go along with the Sheriff Johnson’s version of this matter.