Fresno Democrats gave district attorney a free pass. Now they plead for outside help

In March 2015, four months after her election as Fresno County district attorney, Lisa Smittcamp announced the formation of a Public Integrity Unit to investigate public corruption and election-related crimes.

Smittcamp married into a prominent agriculture family that regularly donates to Republican candidates and causes. But when asked if the special unit would be used to target her political opponents, she gave a swift reply.

“That’s preposterous, frankly,” Smittcamp said during a news conference.

Seven years later, the notion doesn’t seem all that preposterous. Whether true or not, Smittcamp’s perceived bias against elected Democrats (particularly those with brown skin) has become part of the narrative. To the point where local Democratic party officers recently joined labor and nonprofit leaders in urging California Attorney General Rob Bonta to investigate Smittcamp and her handling of the Public Integrity Unit.

“It’s really time that we hold, ultimately, Lisa Smittcamp, accountable for using her office to advance her own personal and political agenda,” said Sandra Celedon, president and CEO of Fresno Building Healthy Communities.

Opinion

Smittcamp did not let the accusations fester. Her office quickly issued a news release welcoming any investigation into the unit and its practices.

“We are confident that the Public Integrity Unit operates independent of partisan politics, and its filing decisions are based solely on the facts of the case, the applicable law, and our ability to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt,” the statement said.

Smittcamp’s political stripes have come into question on multiple occasions, both in cases that involved the Public Integrity Unit and those that don’t.

In 2019, after a jury acquitted Joaquin Arambula of misdemeanor child abuse, Smittcamp cast doubt on the Democratic Assemblymember’s innocence in media interviews. Then this past March, she publicly insinuated the wrongdoing of Fresno City Councilmembers (four of whom are Latino Democrats) despite not charging them with Brown Act violations. The latest imbroglio involves Fresno City Council President Nelson Esparza and felony extortion charges against him that appear flimsy, at best.

There are other examples, but those are the most glaring.

Simple way to hold Smittcamp accountable

Whether any of that merits a state investigation is up to Bonta, who hasn’t shied away from inserting his office into Fresno-area affairs. But if local Democrats really want Smittcamp held accountable, there are other means.

One should be fairly obvious: Challenge her in an election year.

I know, I know. What a wacky idea.

Running unopposed, Smittcamp secured her third four-year term as Fresno County DA in the June primary. In 2018, she also ran unopposed. Meaning 2014 was the last time Smittcamp had to concern herself with courting voters in an actual campaign.

By the time Smittcamp’s new term expires in 2026 (or 2028 if Gov. Gavin Newsom signs AB 759), she’ll have been handed an eight-year hall pass by local Democrats. The same folks who are now calling for Bonta to step in.

Interesting how Fresno County Democrats want the state attorney general’s office to hold Smittcamp accountable — something they’ve failed to do themselves.

To be sure, unseating incumbents in local races isn’t easy. Name recognition alone lends a massive built-in advantage. But if you don’t even bother to try, there’s not much room to complain.

If Fresno County were still a Republican stronghold, then perhaps passivity displayed by local Democrats could be explained or even excused. Newsflash: It’s not. Registered Democrats outnumbered their Republican counterparts by 7.5% heading into the June primary, according to the California Secretary of State.

The difference equates to more than 37,000 voters. Quite a head start at the ballot box. Yet instead of challenging Smittcamp in an election, local Democrats cower and beg for Bonta’s help.

(Yes, I realize countywide offices are considered nonpartisan. But let’s get real. Party affiliation is massively important.)

Democrats give DA a free pass in two elections

Whether any challenger can garner more votes than Smittcamp is beside the point. The point is the campaign itself. How else can anyone effectively challenge her track record, or pose potentially uncomfortable questions in full view of the voting public?

Local Democrats have abdicated that responsibility even though they hold the largest share of the electorate. Either they view Smittcamp as unbeatable, don’t have much confidence in their potential candidates, or both.

As things currently stand, Smittcamp has no reason to release any pertinent information about the Public Integrity Unit. Such as how many cases have been investigated, and how many led to charges and guilty verdicts. Or how many cases have been investigated by party affiliation, ethnicity or city. Or how many cases had to be referred to other agencies due to internal conflicts of interest. Or how many taxpayer dollars have been spent on the unit since 2015.

If Smittcamp ever felt her elected office might be in jeopardy, perhaps she’d answer those questions. Simply for transparency’s sake. But it isn’t, and she doesn’t. Even public records requests are futile because most of the requested information is considered privileged.

Local Democrats had their chance to compel Smittcamp to answer for her political biases and a Public Integrity Unit that seems squarely focused on them. Instead, they granted her a free pass for two election cycles.

Now they want the state attorney general to take up a responsibility they couldn’t bear themselves. Makes them look kind of weak, to be honest.