San Bernardino County Supervisor Dawn Rowe asked for a motion to censure or remove elected auditor-controller/treasurer/tax collector Ensen Mason last Tuesday. Mason is on the ballot, facing off against challenger Ryan Hutchison.

“We have heard Mr. Mason make a lot of accusations directly to the media, as well as on social media, which I don’t believe at all to have merit or truth in them. Can we bring back an item for the board to consider censure or removal?” Rowe asked County Counsel Laura Feingold.

The Board of Supervisors has not voted on the issue, and the agenda for the next meeting has not been released.

Mason told CalMatters last week that he believed speakers at recent Board of Supervisors meetings were put up to attack him by an unknown political group. The Sun’s Beau Yarbrough first reported the claims. Those speakers claimed that Mason’s dual roles as elected  auditor-controller/treasurer/tax collector and owner of a private CPA firm were improper. 

The Board of Supervisors opened an investigation into Mason that will not be concluded by the election. Reports of the investigation were used in Hutchison’s campaign mail. No formal accusations or evidence of improper behavior have surfaced, with the comments on the topic focusing on a perceived conflict of interest.

The investigation was halted by Mason’s request to delay the investigation until after the election, a request he later revoked, according to both Feingold and Mason.

Rowe’s request to agendize a censure vote came after the board voted down Mason’s request to obtain county funds for independent legal counsel to defend himself in the investigation. Feingold told the board that Mason was not entitled to independent legal counsel because he was representing himself personally, rather than the county. 

Prior to the vote, Mason told the Board of Supervisors that any discussion of the case in open session would be a violation of the Brown Act because they would be discussing the possibility of a lawsuit. If they did do so, Mason said, they would need to release the full report to him. Last Monday, Feingold emailed Mason saying that the report, once finished, might not be released to him.

“That report is subject to the attorney-client privilege, which may only be waived by the Board (of Supervisors),” she wrote.

In a video on Mason’s new YouTube channel and a public letter posted on a new campaign website, Mason said he has been targeted because he was opposed to the structure of a county employees’ benefit trust. 

Riverside Superior Court is trying out an artificial intelligence research tool called Learned Hand, CalMatters’ Cayla Mihalovich and Khari Johnson report. Only seven of the court’s research attorneys have access to the tool, which they use in the creation of research memos. 

The tool is currently only being used in civil cases. Court Executive Officer Jason Galkin told CalMatters that the court is not sure how its use will expand, if at all.

“We don’t even know if expansion is likely so there is no set criteria for what expansion might look like or thresholds for that because right now, the core question is: Does this help staff and does it advance what they’re trying to do in their roles?” said Galkin.

The court adopted an AI policy in December that requires AI-generated work to be disclosed, and prohibits the use of AI that’s not court-approved. It also forbids uploading case information to a public language model. 

Learned Hand is led by Shlomo Klapper, a former clerk for a federal appeals court and a former engineer at Palantir. The company claims to avoid AI hallucinations by pulling facts and legal citations from authoritative sources. The data uploaded to the program does not get pulled into a larger database.

For more on how it works, and for a contrast with Los Angeles Superior Court’s use of the same tool, read the story: California judges are testing a new AI clerk, and you won’t know if it’s looking at your case.

The California Assembly passed Sen. Sabrina Cervantes’ (D-Riverside) election integrity bill on May 22, sending it to the governor’s desk in time for it to be in force by the election. The bill passed purely along party lines. 

Senate Bill 73 would further limit law enforcement and military presence at voting sites, and would make it a felony to remove signed ballots from the registrar of voter’s custody.
“In April, (Bianco) told the press that he would gladly, gladly seize ballots again, including the ballots from the June primary where he is on the ballot,” Cervantes said. 

Cervantes compared Bianco’s seizure to President Donald Trump’s admission that he regretted not seizing voting machines in the 2020 election, and the FBI’s seizure of ballots from the Fulton County, Georgia election office.

The June primary gets closer and closer. If your ballot is still not returned, CalMatters’ Voter Guide has you covered. It’s available here. For information on the state offices, check out these links: 

• Superintendent of public instruction

• Lieutenant governor

• Controller

• Secretary of state

• Treasurer

• Insurance commissioner

You can also visit:

Community Forward Redlands’ election guide.

The Press-Enterprise’s voter guide.

Riverside Record’s city council guide.

Riverside Record’s Measure Z guide

Raincross Gazette’s Voter Guide.

Inland Empire Law Weekly's Riverside judicial candidate interviews.

Thanks for reading. While you are here, please sign up for the Inland Empire newsletter and let me know what kinds of stories you'd love to read. Please add my email to your contacts: inlandempire@calmatters.org, and forward our email.