SANTA CRUZ >> Social rights activist Peter Gelblum, faced with the first independent review of the Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Office policies and standards Monday night, questioned how such a study could be accurate.

“You’re relying entirely on what documents the sheriff gives,” said Gelblum, a member of the Santa Cruz chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union speaking on his own behalf. “You have not done anything — I think, I guess that’s the question — to check on the accuracy of the reports.”

Former federal civil rights prosecutor Michael Gennaco fielded questions along with a panel of his peers in a Santa Cruz Governmental Center conference room before a handful of audience members present in person and online.

Gennaco is a principal at the Long Beach-based OIR Group, which serves in the role of the county’s Office of Inspector General. The firm began its work in July 2023, tasked with reviewing and shepherding community complaints against the sheriff’s office and reviewing officer-involved shootings, in-custody deaths and internal affairs investigations alleging excessive or unnecessary use of force, among other duties.

“We’re not just taking the investigative summary or the sheriff’s word for what these individuals said. That would be insufficient, inadequate and I would never sign on to that kind of evaluation because it’s incomplete,” Gennaco responded. “The reason we’re accessing the raw material is because the raw material is critical for us to be able to do an objective evaluation, an effective evaluation of how objective, how fair, how thorough the investigation was,” he said.

Other community concerns raised included the need for Gennaco’s team to request permission to conduct separate investigations — an issue not yet encountered by the firm — and a request or a more thorough accounting of the sheriff’s office’s arsenal.

Gennaco touted the fact that a recommendation made to the sheriff’s office to provide digital copies of the first annual report to incarcerated individuals for feedback, and affirmed and it was “the first county in the state” to provide inmates such an independent audit.

Co-panelist Julie Ruhlin similarly commended the high level of responsiveness and open access to internal affairs complaint investigations provided by the sheriff’s office.

“I think, overall, I would say the evidence in those complaint files shows that the complaints were taken seriously and investigated in a timely way and generally assessed fairly,” Ruhlin said. “Though we did have some recommendations about ways in which the sheriff’s office can improve scoping of the investigation and some of the details provided in the investigative reports.”

Ruhlin noted that a large portion, “hundreds,” of the community complaints made to the inspector general in the previous year had been issued by Santa Cruz County Jail inmates and their family members. She added that many contacts were made by the same individuals who “helped educate us and really build an understanding of what some of the issues are in custody and how the whole operation works.”

“A lot of the issues that people raised, especially early on, had to do with medical care,” Ruhlin said. “The vast majority at the beginning of our time were about concerns over medical care in the jails. We heard from family members and people who were in custody.

Since the county hired a new contractor, NaphCare, in July to replace former medical provider Wellpath, Ruhlin said she has not received a similar level of complaints.

The same inspector general’s report was presented Tuesday morning to the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors. While the physical report presentation will continue to be an annual one, the OIR Group responded to community requests for more frequent updates by committing to post quarterly updates on the county’s website at santacruzcountyca.gov/Departments/OfficeofInspectorGeneral.aspx.

Sheriff Jim Hart, who is set to hand off the elected leadership role to Undersheriff Chris Clark upon his retirement in December, said a committee had been set to review the OIR Group’s recommendations and would likely respond within the coming six months.