Report 2017-101 All Recommendation Responses

Report 2017-101: Concealed Carry Weapon Licenses: Sheriffs Have Implemented Their Local Programs Inconsistently and Sometimes Inadequately (Release Date: December 2017)

Recommendation #1 To: Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department

To ensure that its CCW licensing decisions align with its CCW policy, Los Angeles should only issue licenses to applicants after collecting documentation of specific, personal threats against the applicants so as to satisfy its definition of good cause. If Los Angeles believes that its public licensing policy does not include all acceptable good causes for a CCW license, then by March 2018 it should revise that policy and publish the new policy on its website. It should then immediately begin processing applications according to that revised policy.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2020

Response: Do not concur. The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department has been issuing CCWs consistent with its policies, procedures, and State law. Although the audit concluded the Department was not adhering to policy, this conclusion was based on inadequate documentation rather than evidence of policy violation. Our policies are currently aligned with State law and further defined whereas State law is broad. CCWs have been issued consistent with good cause although, we concur that documentation and retention thereof could be improved. We do not see a need to revise policy based on this audit, however, we recognize a potential need to clarify State law for consistent application throughout its counties.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement

Los Angeles incorrectly asserts that it has issued CCW licenses in accordance with its policies. Figure 1 in our report summarizes the exceptions to Los Angeles's policies and standards that we found in the 25 issued licenses we reviewed. Our report also describes how the department could not demonstrate that it followed its policy related to residency for any of the 25 licenses we reviewed. Also, our report explains Los Angeles's failure to follow its good cause policy in 24 of the 25 licenses we reviewed. Further, five of the files we reviewed did not contain proof of completed training and for three files we reviewed the department could not demonstrate that it had followed its practices related to good moral character.

Recommendation #2 To: Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department

To ensure that it only issues licenses to individuals after receiving evidence of residency, firearms training, and good moral character that aligns with its policy, Los Angeles should only issue licenses after verifying that it has received this evidence. To avoid overlooking required evidence, Los Angeles should create procedures by March 2018 for its staff to follow to ensure that each CCW file contains the evidence its policy requires before issuing the license.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2020

Response: Concur in part. The Department has been issuing CCWs only after applicants have demonstrated good moral character, good cause exists, and residency of the County and firearms training. We agree to improve our process of documenting when an applicant demonstrates they have fulfilled the legal requirements necessary to obtain a CCW. We have therefore developed and implemented a checklist that will be completed before any license is issued, verifying that the file contains all necessary documentation of good moral character, good cause, residency, and training.

Estimated Completion Date: March 2018

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

The department provided us a copy of the checklist it created to verify that applicants provided all required information, but it did not provide us with any evidence of procedures for its staff to follow to ensure that the licenses the department issues comply with its own policy.

Recommendation #3 To: Sacramento County Sheriff's Department

To ensure that staff are gathering consistent evidence from applicants to demonstrate residency, good moral character, and firearms training and are including which requirement applicants did not meet in its denial letters, by March 2018 Sacramento should create formal CCW processing procedures and train its staff to follow these procedures. These procedures should require staff to gather and evaluate the information the department believes is required to demonstrate that each of the criteria for a CCW license has been met, and they should also require staff to include which requirement applicants did not meet in its denial letters.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2023

As of January 2018 the following procedures have been in practice for the Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Concealed Weapons Permitting Office.

New staff are provided one-on-one on-the-job training. More experienced staff are always available to answer questions when they arise. A training manual has been written and is available for future reference. In addition, when any changes are made or suggestions on how the backgrounds could be improved, emails are sent accordingly to all staff.

Regarding requiring staff to gather and evaluate the information the department believes is required to demonstrate that each of the criteria for a CCW license has been met, our Unit emails all CCW staff members as changes arise.

For the issuance of the new, initial CCWs, a senior staff member makes a final review to ensure all criteria have been met.

Completion Date: January 2021

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

To support its response, the Sheriff's Office provided a handout explaining its CCW policies and procedures to the public, but it did not provide evidence that it established CCW processing procedures for its staff. Further, it did not provide any evidence that it trained its staff in following processing procedures.

Auditee did not substantiate its claim of full implementation

Recommendation #4 To: Sacramento County Sheriff's Department

To ensure that staff are following its newly established procedures and to identify any need for additional guidance, by March 2018 Sacramento should establish a review process wherein it regularly reviews a selection of license files and denied applications to determine whether its staff are collecting sufficient and consistent documentation in accordance with its policies and are appropriately including which requirement applicants did not meet in its denial letters.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2023

As of January 2018 the following procedures have been in practice for the Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Concealed Weapons Permitting Office.

For the issuance of the new, initial CCWs, a senior staff member makes a final review to ensure all criteria have been met.

Each week, a senior staff member reviews a minimum of 24 randomly selected CCW applications, including, but not limited to, initial, renewal, duplicate & modified CCW permit applications, to ensure consistency with CCW staff processing of CCW applications.

The Sheriff's Office has appointed a CCW Committee that consists of one Chief Deputy and two Sheriff's Captains. This committee conducts bi-weekly reviews of CCW applications. This Committee has been in place since the Audit in 2017. This panel reviews all new applications for approval or denial. The CCW Committee also oversees revocations of CCW Permits. During this review, the panel discussed how staff collected sufficient and consistent forms and ensured our documentation was by its policies. It includes requirements applicants did not meet in our denial letters as per the recommendations in the "Report 2017-101 Recommendations."

Additionally, the Sheriff's Office has an assigned Chief Deputy who is not on the CCW panel to conduct an independent review of all appeals. The Chief Deputy reviews each denial or revocation that the CCW applicant has appealed in writing. The applicant is notified via mail if their appeal has been denied or granted.

Completion Date: January 2021

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

To support its response, the Sheriff's Office provided a handout explaining its CCW policies and procedures to the public, but this document did not include the review process the Sheriff's department describes in its response.

Auditee did not substantiate its claim of full implementation

Recommendation #5 To: San Diego County Sheriff's Department

To ensure that its staff appropriately renew CCW licenses, by March 2018 San Diego should establish a routine supervisory review of a selection of renewed licenses.

Note: After the conclusion of our audit, the sheriff's department informed us that it did not intend to provide any additional response to the audit beyond what it already provided. The department's response to our audit is included in our original report.

Recommendation #6 To: San Diego County Sheriff's Department

To ensure that it consistently obtains sufficient evidence to demonstrate that an applicant satisfies its requirements for a license, by March 2018 San Diego should develop guidance and train its staff on what good cause documentation staff should request from applicants. Further, it should train its staff regarding the expected documents for residency and training.

Recommendation #7 To: Sacramento County Sheriff's Department

To ensure that it provides all required information to Justice, Sacramento should immediately inform Justice when it revokes a CCW license, including when it receives a prohibition notice from Justice.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2023

As of January 2018, the following procedures have been in practice for the Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Concealed Weapons Permitting Office.

Each denied or revoked applicant may submit an appeal in writing within 30 days from their denial or revocation date. The Chief Deputy not assigned to the CCW Committee reviews the appeal. The applicant is notified in writing if their appeal was approved or denied. If the appeal is approved, the CCW Unit will reissue the CCW Permit. If it is denied, the appellant will be notified by mail. he CCW Unit completes and mails a DOJ Notification of Revocation for each revocation after the 30-day appeal period has expired or when the appeal is denied.

Completion Date: January 2021

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Pending

To support its response, the Sheriff's Office provided a handout explaining its CCW policies and procedures to the public, but this document did not include the Sheriff's process for notifying Justice when it revokes a CCW license.

Auditee did not substantiate its claim of full implementation

Recommendation #8 To: San Diego County Sheriff's Department

To ensure that it follows state law's requirements for revoking licenses, San Diego should immediately revoke CCW licenses and should then inform Justice that it has revoked licenses whenever license holders become prohibited persons. Additionally, San Diego should notify Justice when it suspends a license or a license is surrendered.

Recommendation for Legislative Action

The Legislature should amend state law to clarify that licensing authorities can increase fees for CCW applications, renewals, and modifications above $100, $25, and $10, the respective maximum amounts specified in state law, provided that the fee for an initial application does not exceed the authorities' actual costs and that the rate of increase for any of the fees does not exceed that of the CCPI.

Description of Legislative Action

SB 918 (Portantino, 2022) would have required a local licensing authority to charge a fee to process an application to renew a license to carry a concealed firearm and would have removed the prohibition on a local licensing authority charging more than $25 for that fee. The bill also would have removed the prohibition on a local licensing authority charging more than $10 for processing an application to amend a license to carry a concealed firearm. This bill died in the Assembly.

AB 1297 (Chapter 732, Statutes of 2019) requires a local licensing authority to charge an additional fee to process a new license to carry a concealed firearm and removes the prohibition on a local licensing authority charging more than $100 for that fee.

Legislative Action Current As-of: January 2023

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

Description of Legislative Action

Legislation has not been introduced to address this specific recommendation.

Legislative Action Current As-of: February 2018

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation #10 To: Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department

To ensure that it is only charging fees that state law allows, Los Angeles should immediately cease charging applicants fees in addition to its license processing fee. Los Angeles should reimburse applicants who paid the unallowable fees. Further, if Los Angeles believes its license fee does not recover its entire cost of processing an initial application, it should complete a cost study and, if appropriate, revise its fee according to the results of that study and the maximum allowed fees under state law.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2020

Response: Concur. As mentioned in the audit, the Department has stopped charging the additional fees and has consulted with the county's Auditor-Controller to implement a plan to reimburse individuals entitled to a refund. See LASD website Https://LASD.org/ccw/#ccw_fee

Completion Date: March 2018

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Partially Implemented

To support its response, the department provided a link to its website showing that it no longer charges additional fees beyond its license processing fee. However, the department did not provide any evidence to support the steps it has taken to implement its plan to reimburse individuals entitled to a refund.

Auditee did not substantiate its claim of full implementation
Auditee did not address all aspects of the recommendation

Recommendation #11 To: Sacramento County Sheriff's Department

To ensure that it is maximizing allowable revenue from the CCW program and reducing its program deficits, Sacramento should perform a cost study of its initial application processing and, on completion of the study, immediately increase its CCW license fees and begin charging the maximum amounts allowable under state law.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2023

As of January 2018, the following procedures have been in practice for the Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Concealed Weapons Permitting Office.

A cost study was completed in 2022, which increased fees. A new fee study is currently underway as costs have been noted to be on the rise. The new cost study should be completed in the next month (November 2023).

Completion Date: January 2021

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented

Recommendation #12 To: San Diego County Sheriff's Department

To ensure that it maximizes allowable revenue from its CCW program, San Diego should immediately pursue increasing its initial, renewal, and amendment fees to the maximum amounts allowable under state law.

All Recommendations in 2017-101

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.