You asked for a summary of the discussions about sheriffs at the 1965 Constitutional Convention.

SUMMARY

There is little discussion in the constitutional convention's documents about sheriffs. Two resolutions proposed removing the constitutional provision for sheriffs (Convention Resolutions 23 and 123). No one testified on these resolutions at the committee hearing of the Constitutional Resolution Committee. The committee unfavorably reported both resolutions. The convention debated the issue but did not adopt either resolution. Four delegates discussed whether sheriffs belong in the constitution after the abolition of county government, the services provided by sheriffs and deputy sheriffs, and the cost of replacing their services.

In addition, one person spoke about sheriffs at a Constitutional Public Hearing. James J. Lyons, Jr. spoke about removing "the vestiges of the archaic county government." He mentioned removing the probate court system and selection of deputy sheriffs from the "realm of politics and big city machines" and supported streamlining the two systems.

Attached are copies of the convention documents.

CONVENTION PROCEEDINGS

In the convention proceedings, Delegate Henry Swift argued for deleting the constitutional reference to county sheriffs. He argued for removing these provisions, even though the deputy sheriffs perform valuable services, because county government was eliminated in 1959. He stated that the constitution should be limited to essential principles and policies and that removing the sheriffs was part of doing a complete job even though it was "politically a touchy issue."

Delegate Henry Gwiazda opposed the idea because the deputy sheriffs provide efficient management and service. He did not want to abolish them just because county lines were abolished. He argued that deputies receive money only for the services they render and replacing them would cost the state $2 million, not including the cost of establishing offices and equipment at courts in the state.

Delegate Eugene McCabe abstained from voting because of a vested interest but stated that sheriffs are an essential part of the state and estimated their replacement at close to $5 million. He added that there was no public clamor to do away with them.

Delegate Arline Ryan stated that it "seems a waste of time to debate something that has been decided as decisively as this matter has." She stated that the resolution has nothing to do with deputy sheriffs but only removes the constitutional right of sheriffs. She believed that removing them from the constitution was appropriate because the sheriffs are not qualified to run the jails.

CR:gt