Deputies question jail safety, elect not to endorse Ian Parkinson

May 12, 2018

Sheriff Ian Parkinson

Members of the Deputy Sheriff’s Association have voted twice not to endorse San Luis Obispo County Sheriff Ian Parkinson in his campaign to keep his seat in the June 5 election, while questioning his management of the county jail. [Cal Coast Times]

For more than a year, deputies have voiced concerns over issues of mandatory overtime and management at the jail. In one complaint, a deputy alleges the department’s practices are detrimental to the health and safety of correctional staff.

“The jail facility is a Petri dish that is full of germs, disease, viruses beyond any imagination,” the complaint says. “The County of San Luis Obispo is creating a safety and security risk for a jail facility and jail staff whose well-being and health is compromised.”

An endorsement requires a two-thirds vote of approval. In past elections, the association endorsed Parkinson.

However, in early April, the correctional deputies union voted not to endorse Parkinson or his opponent Greg Clayton.

On April 14, the association notified both candidates that neither had received a two-thirds vote. Less than a week later, sheriff department administration staffers requested the union take another vote because nine deputies had not turned in their ballots, inside sources said.

After a second vote, the outcome remained the same, neither candidate received two-thirds and an endorsement.

In an email to the candidates, association president Lars Luther writes that the correctional deputies will not be endorsing any candidates for sheriff or district attorney.

“After completing a second vote, the DSA, the association representing employees other than patrol division will not be endorsing any candidates in the current races for sheriff or DA,” Luther says in the email to the candidates.


Parkinson is a killer sheriff; he deserves more than just your vote.


If the same people in charge are left to run the jail, nothing will change. The removal of Jeff Hamm is a start. How about putting medically trained management in charge of running jail medical services? I know that seems logical and all, so it probably won’t happen. Also, keeping Ian Parkinson in place will result in more sheriff substations at old people golf courses, more unicorn catchers, more panga boat catchers. That could all be money to be spent expanding mental health beds NOT at the jail, providing preventative services. But hey, we could keep doing what we’ve been doing……


Remember Jeff Hamm isn’t gone, he still is collecting 100%+ of his salary plus benefits, he just doesn’t have to go into the office anymore.

Jorge Estrada

One more reason to vote for Ian.

JB Bronson

Well there you go Ian. Your own kind see past the political lipstick you have resorted to and would rather work for a different sheriff.


Be carefull how much credibility you give employee unions. Their stands on issues, candidates, etc., usually have more to do with their contracts than what is best for the community. For example, if a teacher’s union comes out in favor of something…..I suspect it is likely what they want is not in the students’ best interest. If a government union is against something, that doesn’t mean it is bad for the community….just bad for their pocketbooks.


If his “own kind” won’t endorse Ian why the hell should any voter? They know him better than any of us could and they say NO? Why should the voter do any different? They shouldn’t, but I’d make a small wager he’s reelected because the general public doesn’t give a rats arse about his management style, jail conditions or how many die in his care.


He will get reelected because anyone who watched him debate Clayton saw that Clayton is hopelessly over his head.