Letters to the Editor: The taxpayers shouldn’t have to shell out for Bianco’s political stunt

To the editor: It is hard to accept the audacity of Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco now seeking reimbursement for legal expenses in connection to his February seizure of 650,000 Proposition 50 special election ballots from 2025, reportedly to identify voting irregularities (“Sheriff Chad Bianco asks Riverside County to foot legal bills over ballot seizure,” Oct. 24).

No one asked or directed Bianco to seize the ballots, and there apparently was no subsequent public report of Bianco’s review of them. While the seizure was approved by a Bianco-friendly judge, the California attorney general, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors and the state Supreme Court all found the ballot seizure to be unwarranted and outside the scope of the sheriff’s responsibility.

It is no coincidence that at the time, Bianco was a candidate for governor. The ballot seizure has to be viewed as a political stunt to gain attention for his candidacy.

He came in fourth in the June 2026 primary election. In view of all of the foregoing, there is no reason that the taxpayers should have to cover the costs of Bianco’s inappropriate political move to gain attention for his candidacy.

Gary Wartik, Palm Desert

..

To the editor: Bianco’s seizure of hundreds of thousands of special election ballots has been ruled unlawful by the California Supreme Court. Bianco claims that he was acting within the scope of his job with the seizure. The Riverside County Board of Supervisors voted 4 to 1 against funding Bianco’s legal defense. Furthermore, most of the Board of Supervisors did not believe Bianco was acting within the scope of his job.

Bianco actually had broken election law by seizing ballots, per the state Supreme Court’s ruling. If anyone should be sued, it should be Bianco for breaking the law and the GOP-endorsed judge for allowing the illegal seizure of the 650,000 special ballots.

Neil Snow, Manhattan Beach