An attempt to remove Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos was unsuccessful during a Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday night. However, the board decided to refer perjury allegations concerning Nanos to the state attorney general’s office, amid growing scrutiny of his record and his handling of the Nancy Guthrie case.
Republican Steve Christy proposed declaring the sheriff’s office vacant and immediately starting the process to replace him. The motion did not receive a second and thus failed to proceed.
Democrat Rex Scott subsequently proposed referring the perjury allegations against Nanos to the state AG’s office, a motion that the board approved with a 4-0 vote, with Christy abstaining.
“My chief concern with what’s been going on within the sheriff’s department is that our elected sheriff has taken no discernible efforts to repair relationships and trust within our largest department,” Scott stated after the vote. “The most telling example of that was the unanimous vote of the Pima County Deputy’s Organization declaring no confidence in his leadership.”
The board’s actions concluded a contentious debate over allegations that the lead investigator in the Guthrie kidnapping case lied under oath about his previous police record.
These developments emerged following weeks of increasing pressure from county leadership. Supervisors Christy and Democrat Matt Heinz have called for either the removal of the elected sheriff or formal action against him.
“This is accountability for a guy who has evaded accountability for decades,” Heinz told Fox News Digital, describing Nanos as a “public safety threat.”
The controversy centers on claims that Nanos misled officials about his disciplinary history as a Texas police officer in the 1970s and 1980s. The allegations arose from a lawsuit deposition in which Nanos stated under oath that he had never been suspended as a law enforcement officer.
The timeline of the disappearance of Savannah Guthrieâs mom:
Records from El Paso, first obtained by the Arizona Republic and later made public by the county, reveal that he was suspended multiple times and resigned instead of facing termination.
Christy noted that Nanos had already missed a deadline to answer questions under oath from the board, intensifying the situation.
“He’s already failed that request… so we’re into the next phase,” Christy said, suggesting a potential move to declare the office vacant.
Given that the sheriff is an elected official, removing him involves legal complexities. Supervisors have pointed to an infrequently used Arizona law from the 1800s as a potential avenue.
Even without removal, Heinz stated the board could take other actions, such as passing a resolution expressing a lack of confidence or referring the allegations for criminal investigation by the state attorney general.
He also mentioned that a conviction on perjury charges would eventually result in the sheriff’s removal from office.
Adding to the tension, both parties have engaged outside legal counsel instead of relying on the county attorney’s office, which Christy indicated is costing taxpayers additional money.
In a written response to the board, Nanos contested the allegations, claiming they stem from a misunderstanding rather than perjury.
His lawyer argued that Nanos’ testimony only pertained to his career in Arizona, asserting he was never suspended during his time with the Pima County Sheriff’s Department, although he faced disciplinary action earlier in Texas.
The memo also confirms that Nanos resigned from the El Paso Police Department in 1982 rather than accept a proposed suspension following a dispute with a supervisor.
Heinz has disputed this characterization, contending the record indicates Nanos resigned in lieu of termination, not discipline.
The sheriff declined to answer questions in person under oath, opting instead to submit a notarized statement to the board after the deadline. Heinz noted this might still be accepted but does not address the fundamental issues.
The investigation into Guthrie’s February 1 disappearance has now extended beyond 100 days with few public developments.
The case, involving the 84-year-old mother of “Today” co-host Savannah Guthrie, has received national attention and created tension between Nanos and the FBI. This includes a public dispute with Director Kash Patel over whether federal agents were initially excluded.
Heinz has called on the sheriff to transfer the investigation to federal authorities.
“It’s ridiculous,” he said. “Almost every other jurisdiction would have done so by now.”
More than $1.2 million in reward money is currently being offered for information that leads to answers, as her family continues to seek help.
