Should he stay, or should he go? Issues, approaches and philosophies aside, the 2012 election for Pima County sheriff comes down to that one basic question.

After 32 years in office, should Clarence Dupnik get a ninth term based on his long and successful track record, or is it time to shake things up and get a fresh face in there?

Republican Mark Napier and Green Party candidate Dave Croteau side with the latter. But voters have overwhelmingly favored Dupnik, a Democrat, since he was first elected in 1980, giving him at least 55 percent of the vote each time. In many elections, they picked him by a nearly a 2-to-1 margin.

Not bad for a man who said he never wanted to be sheriff. But after being appointed to that post by the Pima County Board of Supervisors in 1980, Dupnik quickly realized the position was the only way he was going to stay in law enforcement.

“If I wanted a job, I had to run for the office,” Dupnik said last week.

More than three decades later, the 76-year-old said he’s ready for another four years, despite the ‘He won’t last another term’ rumors.

“They’ve said that for the last three terms, the last three elections,” Dupnik said of his supposed intention to retire in the middle of his term, thus enabling him to hand-pick a successor. “The problem is they can’t find any scandals or anything to report about. I’m going to keep going as long as I can, and the people allow it.”

Napier, 52, who lines up as Dupnik’s toughest challenger in recent memory after blowing away the competition in a five-way race for the GOP nomination, said he’s heard those rumors as well. And while he won’t comment on their veracity—”He knows his intentions better than I do,” Napier said—he does say that Dupnik’s legacy is based too much on the past.

“From the ’80s to the mid-’90s, (Dupnik) said he did a good job, and that’s a factual statement,” Napier said. “But since then, it’s stagnated. Every once in a while, it’s good to shake up the culture and ask, ‘Why do we do it that way?’ It’s just time for a more-visible, more-engaged, more-effective sheriff—certainly a more-energetic one.”

Napier points to the candidates’ websites as an example of Dupnik’s lackadaisical approach. Napier’s site includes a bevy of information about his credentials and what he wants to do as sheriff. Dupnik’s is basically a retrospective on his career, along with an invitation to go to the Sheriff’s Department website for more information. There’s no contact information listed.

“If you want to know what I’m going to do in the future, look at my platform page,” Napier said. “Go to Dupnik’s page; it tells you what he’s done in the past. There’s a donate button on there, but there’s no way to contact him. If you’re not willing to be contacted by your constituents, what does that say?”

Dupnik scoffs at the notion he’s become complacent, ticking off a series of proposals: Get all local law enforcement and first-responders on an integrated wireless network; develop a better way to assess suspected mental illness before tragedy occurs; create patrols that would focus on chronic street criminals.

His re-election campaign has put a premium on the word “keep,” using it in all promotional materials. The incumbent said this is meant to bridge the gap between what he’s done and what he still wants to do.

“I don’t think you ever accomplish everything you want to do in life,” Dupnik said. “I’d like to see what we might (still) be able to do.”

Croteau, 61, got 16 percent of the vote against Dupnik in 2000 and has run for Tucson mayor three times. He considers Dupnik’s plans just more of the same: the militarization of police and too much of a focus on low-level drug crime.

“The sheriff doesn’t need to network with 18 (law-enforcement) agencies; he needs to network with 250 neighborhood associations,” Croteau said. “I want to honestly discuss the role of sheriff, and transition it into peacekeeping from just law enforcement. I’m the only clear choice. Nothing is fresher than my ideas.”

Many of the “Keep Dupnik” signs found throughout the county have smaller signs attached to them that say he has the endorsement of the Pima County Deputy Sheriff’s Association, which represents about 70 percent of all sworn officers with the rank of sergeant or below.

Chairman Joseph Cameron said the PCDSA board voted for the endorsement because not enough members attended the April meeting when the issue was set to be discussed. But an email vote on whether to spend association money on radio ads and campaign signs was “overwhelmingly approved,” Cameron said.

“Dupnik’s a Democrat, and in general, most police officers are conservative; they’re Republican,” said Cameron, a 25-year Sheriff’s Department veteran. “The guys don’t always agree with what he says, but the reason the guys endorsed him is … he runs a really good organization. He treats us fairly. He keeps us in the black—no layoffs, no furloughs.”

Napier said he’d do the same, tapping into his experience—he retired from the Tucson Police Department as a captain—as well as his business pedigree as an administrator with the University of Arizona’s Parking and Transportation Services and head of Boston University’s online criminal justice program, to take a more-modern approach.

He cited the recent incident involving around eight Pima County Jail corrections officers (the jail is under the sheriff’s control) in the savage beating of four men outside of the Buffet bar. Though most of the officers have either been fired or suspended, Napier said the real question is whether the incident could have been prevented internally.

“This was an unprovoked, aggressive attack by a large number of Pima County employees against an individual who was innocent,” Napier said. “I would say that it would cause me a great deal of discomfort. … It might be indicative of a systemic problem. I’d want to find out how we got to this point.”

Dupnik said the incident was an “aberration” and has nothing to do with his department. He said the fact that discipline has been swift and stern shows he didn’t condone the actions.

“I think that’s one of the things that keep the sheriff more attuned to the community and more responsive to the community,” Dupnik said. “If I’m running a lousy organization, I can kiss my chances of being sheriff goodbye. And it should be that way.”

11 replies on “Change vs. Stability”

  1. I agree it is time for a change- but as long as he has Green Valley’s support – its unlikely to happen.. Tough to get rid of a croonie likr Dupnik.

  2. come on!!! We deserve a change in Pima County! Dupnik needs to realize that he has had a long run and we deserve someone with fresh ideas and a desire to work! Dupnik was great in his earlier day – but please show some respect for this town and retire and let someone with the energy and passion for the job take it! Why is it that the folks like Dupnik, Huckelberry and LaWall don’t have a clue that they have had their time and they should show some respect and concern for this town and retire??? We deserve better representation!

  3. If you guys want a Republican sheriff, then move to Maricopa County….no, wait, he’s about to lose this election! Try Pinal County. Maybe Babeau will survive his record.

  4. Cascabel, the sheriff’s race is a partisan race but public safety is not a partisan issue. It is rather a human issue; a community issue. This is a race that should not be decided by either side of the political spectrum because of an “R” or a “D” behind someone’s name. We should be looking for the best person to represent all of us in this office. I hope you would support me, even though I am a Republican.

    Thanks,

    Mark Napier

  5. As a resident of Tucson for over 30 years, I applaud Sheriff Dupnik for keeping Pima County safe. He has been an excellent sheriff and will be getting my vote. I’m well aware of the policies of Republicans…including Arpaio up the Maricopa–and I don’t want “Phoenix creep” down here. It is so nasty, full of ugly politics and completely divisive. In fact, I’m reading today that Arpaio is probably on the last legs of his career and will be voted out. Please don’t let Phoenix politics invade our county. A vote for Dupnik is a vote for security as well as sanity.

  6. Grandma8, while I am a Republican I am not anything like Sheriff Joe. Nor do I desire our county to become like Maricopa County. You may note that my campaign has been very positive, with no nastiness at all. Even Sheriff Dupnik readily acknowledges that.

    Mark

  7. Dupnik has a clear and long record as a true leader and continues to be progressive in his approach to fighting crime. Yes, check out the PCSD website, it reflects and represents what Dupnik has built and continues to grow. Mark Napier’s record is one that stopped at captain with TPD ( what, couldn’t make Chief?); a stint at Glendale (folks should “consider” what really happened there and why he lost that short lived job); a failed attempt for the Oro Valley City Council (failed there so lets try sheriff, jumping in late in the race); so Napier really hasn’t been too successful and has had more failures than successes. Napier should prepare for one more failed attempt in his “lackluster” run at sheriff.

  8. Johnson seems rather childish – if you knew anything – there can only be a few Chiefs and a smart man – with something to offer, will move on and try to lead another Agency. Moreover perhaps the fact that TPD can create genuine leaders beyond the few “Chiefs” they have – should reflect positively. Take a moment to look around at what TPD has spawn – a “CHIEF” at the U of A, a “Chief” at Marana, a “Chief” at Oro Valley. Perhaps TPD has is creating something great. And PCSO is lucky that the man looking to be their Sheriff is intent on viewing PCSO as PCSO, not TPD – and wants to make a great agency even better. Its time for blacklisting and voting on name recognition to stop. Pima County voters are smart enough to look at everything. They will do the right thing and vote for Napier.

  9. I’d hate to blow away all that knowledge, all that experience, just on a whim. “Fresh ideas”? In my day, they used to call that knowledge, experience, know-how. He knows that he knows. Why rock the boat by changing the captain?

Comments are closed.