The Sheriff’s Department asked the Racine Journal-Times, “Is it that your reporters are unintelligent, biased, partisan . . . or a dangerous combination of the mix?”
The Racine County Sheriff’s Department is accusing the Racine Journal Times of making false statements and engaging in “unethical conduct.” The controversy emerged about reporting into the Department’s enforcement of a federal eviction moratorium.
In a lengthy smack-down posted to Facebook, the Sheriff’s Department wrote: “In no way shape or form did the Sheriff’s Office take any of the positions described by Racine Journal Times employee Scott Williams (as thoroughly explained below). The Sheriff’s Office reasserts their previous question to the Racine Journal Times that it directed at Adam Rogan – Is it that your reporters are unintelligent, biased, partisan . . . or a dangerous combination of the mix?” (Rogan is a local editor at the newspaper).
The statement was signed by Sgt. Michael J. Luell, Public Information Officer.
People responded favorably on the Department’s Facebook thread. “Good for you Sheriff! The media should be called out for trying twist the story to make y’all look bad,” wrote one woman. “Thank you for standing your ground and doing the right thing as always. The Journal Times is a ‘left leaning’ paper that always seems to tell a story their way without any ramifications until now. Thank you,” wrote another.
We’ve reached out to Rogan and Williams to see if they want to comment.
Racine Sheriff Eviction Reporting Controversy, What Happened?
“On today’s date, August 6, 2021, the Racine Journal Times continued with (their) unfounded, unethical, and unprofessional comments when Scott Williams wrote an article entitled, ‘Racine elected officers urge sheriff to comply with federal eviction moratorium,’ and stated: ‘One day after the moratorium was announced, the Racine County Sheriff’s Office on Wednesday said it [would] not abide by the moratorium and would follow through with any evictions that are requested in the county,'” the Sheriff’s Department wrote in a lengthy statement posted to its Facebook page.
“In a written statement, the [S]heriff’s [D]epartment questioned the authority of the CDC director as an ‘unelected’ government official, and noted that ‘duly elected’ members of Congress had just days earlier allowed the evictions moratorium to expire. The [S]heriff’s statement also asserted that a federal order prohibiting landlords from carrying out evictions constitutes an action to ‘take away property.'”
This was followed by a lengthy statement called, “SHERIFF SCHMALING IS COMPLETELY COMMITTED TO UPHOLDING THE LAW.”
This was the Racine Sheriff’s statement in full:
“Simply put: the actions of the Sheriff’s Office are correct and legal. The Sheriff’s Office has no say on who is evicted – that is a legal determination made by a judge in a court of law. The Sheriff’s Office has a statutory obligation to carry out the judge’s mandatory order.”
The statement then contained a section called, “Setting the record straight.” It reads:
“As stated below and thoroughly explained, the decision to evict a tenant is a judicial decision made in the court of law. If there is no eviction (because of the eviction moratorium, a lack of evidence, a valid defense, etc.) the judge does not order an eviction, no order is received by the Sheriff’s Office, and no action is taken by the Sheriff’s Office. Judges evict people and the Sheriff’s Office simply complies with its legal responsibilities to follow the judge’s order.
As stated below and thoroughly explained, Adam Rogan of the Racine Journal Times appears to not know the definition of the word ‘despite.’ The word ‘despite’ means without being affected by; in spite of; notwithstanding; regardless of. The Sheriff’s Office did not state they would act regardless of the eviction moratorium order. Instead, the Sheriff’s Office stated it would act consistent with the moratorium order.
If a judge decides the moratorium order applies to a case, nothing happens. If a judge decides the moratorium order does not apply to the case and issues a Writ of Restitution, the Sheriff’s Office will follow that lawful order. So, the question needs to be asked: Is Adam Rogan acting unintelligently or is he unethically attempting to create a controversy where none exists?
As stated below and thoroughly explained, one must wonder if Representative Neubauer, City of Racine Mayor Cory Mason, and Racine City Council President John Tate II even read Representative Neubauer’s press release. In the release, it is stated:
• “The Racine County Sheriff’s Department has stated that they will continue to carry out evictions if orders are approved by a judge” – Yes, that is how the law works!
• “We hope and expect that Racine’s Circuit Court judges and law enforcement agencies will abide by the order, which carries the force of law, and honor the federal eviction moratorium for any and all residents who qualify for protection.” — Yes, we will! But have you read the order? Do you know how the order works? Do you know that people may not be eligible for the order? Do you know that there are exceptions to the order?
• “While the federal eviction moratorium would prevent many evictions in Racine County, residents must proactively complete a CDC COVID Eviction Declaration and provide it to their landlord. The Declaration form and additional information regarding the eviction moratorium are available at this link.
By stating the eviction moratorium would prevent “many” evictions, you are acknowledging that evictions will still occur. How do you propose the Sheriff’s Office respond to these legal orders by a judge?
This is why Sgt. Luell ended his initial response to Adam Rogan’s question with this statement: “However, if our Civil Process Unit receives a Writ of Restitution from a Racine County Judge to commence an eviction, the deputies will follow the appropriate procedures and conduct the eviction.”
The position of the Sheriff’s Office is correct and legal. The people mentioned in this response should think about their positions more carefully, do their homework, and consider why they took their respective positions. Are they attempting to create a controversy?
Lastly, I ask the Racine Journal Times to respond to the patently false statements made in Adam Rogan’s August 4, 2021 article: (1) were these statements made intentionally, recklessly, or negligently; (2) will the Racine Journal Times retract these statements; and (3) are there significant competency and/or ethical issues at the Racine Journal Times?”
Under a section called “Evictions,” the Sheriff’s Department wrote:
“Evictions are a legal decision conducted by a duly elected judge in the court of law. The Sheriff’s Office has no power to decide who is, or is not, evicted. The eviction process starts by a landlord initiating a lawsuit against a tenant. The landlord has the burden of production, and the tenant may respond to the allegations and defend their position of why they should not be evicted. Currently, tenants have the additional argument or defense of the eviction moratorium. Ultimately, the judge makes the legal decision of whether a tenant should be evicted.
If the judge decides there should not be an eviction (because the landlord did not prove their case or the eviction moratorium would apply to the case), the judge would not order an eviction, the Sheriff’s Office would not receive any type of documentation of the non-order, and the Sheriff’s Office would take no action. If, however, the judge determines that the landlord has met their burden of production and the eviction moratorium did not apply in this case, the judge would order the eviction and issue a Writ of Restitution. Once the Sheriff’s Office received the Writ of Restitution, which is a legal order, the Sheriff’s Office is legally bound to carry out the judge’s order and conduct the eviction.”
In a section titled “Background,” the Department wrote:
“On September 11, 2020, the Racine Journal Times published a story entitled, ‘More relief for renters; CDC eviction stay through Dec. 31.’ In this article, the issues surrounding tenants facing evictions was discussed, as-well-as the moratorium on some of these evictions. It was explained that to qualify for the moratorium, tenants would have to sign a declaration stating:
• They have tried to get government help for rent or housing
• They have earned less than $99,000 in 2020 ($198,000 for joint filers); Or they did not have to file taxes in 2019; or they received a CARES stimulus check
• They cannot pay due to lost income, a layoff or medical expenses
• They are trying to make partial payments
• If they are evicted, they will likely become homeless, use a homeless shelter or move into a place with others in close contact