Supervisors to Sue Sheriff Duffy Over Drug Funds : Politics: County board claims it should control money seized in drug raids that Duffy has kept in secret account since summer.

Angered that San Diego County Sheriff John Duffy set up a secret fund for federal money seized in drug raids, the Board of Supervisors decided Tuesday to file a lawsuit to regain control of the money.

The civil lawsuit is expected to be filed today in San Diego Superior Court. The board reached a consensus in closed session to go to court over the matter, which has further soured the already strained relationship between supervisors and the outgoing sheriff.

The suit could include a request for a temporary restraining order to prevent Duffy from making further allocations from the secret account, county officials suggested.

The board wants the court to force Duffy to account for more than $300,000 seized in drug raids--called asset-forfeiture funds--and return the money to the control of the supervisors, said county spokesman Bob Lerner.

County auditors discovered the secret account last week.

“The board authorized county counsel to take whatever legal action is necessary” to resolve matter and return the money “to where it belongs in the county treasury,” Lerner said.

Since summer, Duffy has failed to deposit more than $300,000 in drug funds into the county treasury as required by law and instead established a separate, secret bank account for the money to bypass supervisors. Federal guidelines say the federal money may be used only for law enforcement purposes. Duffy said that the supervisors have no authority over the money.

With both sides refusing to budge over the dispute, Duffy said: “If those differences cannot be resolved through discussion and negotiation, the court will be the appropriate forum for resolution.”

Duffy has refused a request under the state public records act to release details of the secret fund because, he said, the money has been deposited in a private bank account. He said Monday that deposits and interest in the account are “substantial,” and that disbursements have been “minimal,” primarily to the district attorney’s office and other local law enforcement agencies that have participated in drug arrests. The sheriff said he will release more details about the account when legal issues are resolved.

Supervisor Brian Bilbray said the board insists that the drug-seizure money belongs to the county government--not the Sheriff’s Department--and that the Board of Supervisors is responsible for those funds.

“The county can be held liable, and so we have the right to know what’s going on with those funds,” Bilbray said. Duffy “wants to control that money but avoid the liability,” he said. What he’s done is an inappropriate use of funds by any county employee. . . . He wants to be exempt from the local review process.”

Duffy said Monday he had consulted the U.S. attorney’s office, U.S. Justice Department, his own private attorney and sheriffs in other counties before opening the account sometime after June 30, when supervisors prohibited him from spending the money without their approval.

The supervisors’ move was prompted by Duffy’s request in May to spend $450,000 for computers. Board members, led by Supervisor Susan Golding, insisted the money be used to improve security at local jails, where there was a rash of escapes this spring. The board passed an ordinance in June that prohibits Duffy from spending money without the board’s approval.

On Monday, Duffy accused Golding of persuading other board members to try to take control of the drug funds because of the Sheriff’s Department role in the criminal investigation of Golding’s husband, Richard Silberman.

Duffy previously accused Golding of promoting the measure but never said it was in retaliation for his role in investigating her husband, who in September was sentenced to 46 months in federal prison for his role in a money-laundering scheme.

Golding denied that contention Tuesday, calling it ludicrous and unfounded. Golding acknowledged that she originated the move to spend the money to improve jail security measures rather than comply with Duffy’s request to buy laptop computers. But she and other supervisors said the board’s move to control the drug funds was by consensus, and that Golding was not the driving force behind the measure.

Dist. Atty. Edwin Miller said Friday that he will not initiate a criminal investigation of Duffy for creating the secret account.

Duffy also used nearly $70,000 in drug-seizure funds to pay his attorney in a civil lawsuit filed against him by six of his deputies. The county has asked that he return those funds as well.

No information was available on how Duffy would pay his legal bills to fight the lawsuit the supervisors plan to file.

The sheriff has maintained since May that the board’s vote to control the drug-seizure funds violates federal guidelines and jeopardizes the county’s ability to get additional federal drug funds.