A judge permanently removed St. Louis Sheriff Alfred Montgomery from office on Tuesday.
The decision by St. Louis Circuit Judge Steven R. Ohmer brings a dramatic end to Montgomery’s turbulent yearlong tenure — one marked by lawsuits, whistleblower complaints, a damning city audit and a court battle over whether he should remain in office.
Ohmer concluded that Montgomery’s failures in multiple areas outlined by the state were sufficient to justify removal, even after one allegation — nepotism — was dropped during the proceedings.
“Respondent has willfully neglected his official duties and, as a result, has forfeited the office of sheriff for the City of St. Louis,” the judge wrote in his decision. Ohmer was asked to take on the case after all members of the 22nd Circuit’s bench recused themselves. “It is further ordered that the temporary order of removal is hereby made permanent and the respondent is hereby ordered ousted from the office of sheriff for the City of St. Louis.”
Former Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey had filed a quo warranto petition in a bid to oust Montgomery in June, and his successor, Catherine Hanaway, continued the effort.
The petition alleged six counts of misconduct by Montgomery, including illegal arrests, financial mismanagement and refusing to transport detainees for medical care. The state dropped one — nepotism — after court documents and DNA tests disproved that the sheriff was brothers with a deputy.
Ohmer wrote that the majority of the attorney general’s allegations did not amount to a removal — several being ongoing political disputes between officials. He based his decision on Montgomery ordering the handcuffing of then-acting jail Commissioner Tammy Ross and disarming former Sheriff’s Deputy Darryll Wilson.
Courtesy
/
Missouri Attorney General
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey included this exhibit of St. Louis Sheriff Alfred Montgomery detaining acting City Justice Center Commissioner Tammy Ross at the City Justice Center last February.
“This Court finds that the actions by [Montgomery] in both of these instances to be a clear violation of his duties and responsibilities as Sheriff and an improper interference in the orderly enforcement of the criminal laws by the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department,” the judge wrote. “By interjecting himself into the criminal investigations of a police nature, [Montgomery] willfully violated his official duties and thereby neglected to perform his actual duties as Sheriff.”
Ohmer said the sheriff’s insistence that the two incidents were part of internal affairs investigations does not justify “improper efforts to enforce the criminal laws.”
The judge further ruled Montgomery will pay the costs associated with the case — including almost $7,000 for transporting the sheriff from federal custody.
“Corruption in public office must not be tolerated. The removal of Alfred Montgomery is a win for the people of St. Louis and a step towards restoring integrity and trust in our government and the rule of law,” wrote Hanaway in a statement following the verdict. “Missourians deserve better from those in positions of trust. Our Office will continue using the full force of the law to hold any misconduct or malfeasance in public office accountable.”
David C. Mason, a lawyer representing Montgomery, said he respected Ohmer’s ruling but was unsure if the evidence presented supported the decision.
“However, I will not be directly involved in an appeal,” he said, adding he is going back to his part-time office attorney job. “I do anticipate that his lawyers will be taking a close look at that option.”
Laurie Skrivan
/
Pool via St. Louis Post-Dispatch
St. Louis Sheriff Alfred Montgomery enters court for trial in the Missouri attorney general’s attempt to remove him from office on Nov. 19 at the Clyde S. Cahill Courthouse in downtown St. Louis.
What comes next?
While Montgomery is no longer in office, his legal troubles are not over.
The former sheriff still faces a federal misdemeanor charge in the handcuffing of Ross, along with five federal felony counts of witness tampering and retaliation. The misdemeanor carries a potential sentence of up to one year in prison. The felony charges could result in a combined sentence of up to 100 years — up to 20 years on each charge.
Former St. Louis Police Chief John Hayden is currently interim sheriff. Officials are still determining how to fill the vacancy permanently, but who has the authority to make that decision remains unresolved.
Hanaway, a Republican, previously told St. Louis Public Radio that she believes Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe has the power to appoint a replacement. She added that the governor and Mayor Cara Spencer appeared to be in agreement with the governor on a candidate.
Board of Aldermen President Megan Green disputes that interpretation.
In a letter previously sent to Spencer, Green said she would not support any selection process that excludes the board. She wrote that the board understands Missouri law to require the mayor, the comptroller and the board itself to be involved in selecting a new sheriff.
“The integrity of this appointment — and the integrity of the appointment process itself — are essential to reestablishing trust in an embattled office,” Green wrote to the mayor. “I share the same commitment you’ve expressed to keeping this decision in the hands of local elected officials, which is why it’s imperative we’re aligned on this matter.”
Green has said the board wants to hold public hearings to allow residents to weigh in on potential candidates.
History offers conflicting precedents. In 1978, when former Sheriff Benjamin L. Goins was forced to step down after being convicted of federal corruption and tax evasion charges, then-City Counselor Jack L. Koehr concluded that Missouri law required a special election within 30 days of the vacancy occurring.
More recently, however, the governor appointed a replacement after St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner resigned — another county-level office.
Spencer said the law provides no clear answer.
“It’s a complicated web of regulations,” Spencer told STLPR. “While there are a lot of opinions, the only thing that is clear is that it’s not actually clear who has appointing authority in case of a vacancy in the St. Louis sheriff’s office.”
The mayor bypassed a recently passed Board of Aldermen resolution that asked the city to include the board in any legal action related to resolving the matter. St. Louis formally sued the state earlier this month, asking a judge in Cole County to determine who has appointing authority. The lawsuit argued that the power belongs to the mayor under the city charter, despite historical precedent suggesting otherwise.
The city withdrew the lawsuit the following day and refiled it in St. Louis’ 22nd Judicial Circuit. A city spokesperson declined to explain the change of venue.
Brian Munoz
/
St. Louis Public Radio
14th Ward Alderman Rasheen Aldridge, third from left, leads the St. Louis Board of Aldermen’s Budget and Public Employees Committee hearing on June 2 at City Hall in downtown St. Louis.
The board sues
On Tuesday, Green and the Board of Aldermen sued the city and state over Spencer’s declaratory judgment lawsuit that didn’t include the city’s legislative body.
“In filing this lawsuit, the mayor and the city counselor removed all doubt that they intended to exclude the Board from the process of selecting a replacement sheriff,” the board’s suit states. “This attack on the Board’s institutional power could not be ignored and the Board responded by passing a Board Resolution asserting its position.”
The board maintains that Spencer and interim City Counselor Michael Garvin have repeatedly ignored their letters demanding the Board of Aldermen — and public — be included in the talks related to the sheriff’s replacement.
But the board members said Garvin told them the board does not have the power to be party to any lawsuit — either being sued or suing.
“To the city counselor, the mayor is the City. In his view, the mayor exclusively decides and speaks for the City, while the Board is surplusage, a mere department subordinate to the mayor,” the board’s suit says. “As one might expect, the Board was not happy to be told they were, in the eyes of their lawyer, inconsequential in these important matters.”
The board hired outside counsel and is asking a circuit judge to decide the matter.
“The petition filed by the mayor did not include [and] did not ask the judge to consider whether, or what part, the board played,” said 5th Ward Alderman Matt Devoti. “From a big-picture perspective, it’s important that the board protects its rights, its responsibilities, under Missouri law — and for that matter, local law.”
Alderwoman Daniela Velázquez of the 6th Ward said: “This is not a step the board takes lightly. We believe both precedent and state law make clear that the Board of Aldermen has a role in this process. Today’s action reflects our shared commitment, as a unified legislative body, to uphold our responsibility and protect the integrity of our city’s institutions.”
Brian Munoz
/
St. Louis Public Radio
St. Louis Sheriff Alfred Montgomery remains silent as media barrage him with questions after leaving a heated Board of Aldermen budget hearing on June 2 at City Hall in downtown St. Louis.
How we got here
Montgomery’s troubles have been brewing for the past year.
They started when he handed out termination letters to former Sheriff Vernon Betts’ top brass before being sworn in.
Betts signed off on hundreds of hours of his senior official’s accrued compensatory time before he left, documents show. The move arguably cost the office hundreds of thousands of dollars, according to an audit by the St. Louis comptroller’s office. City auditors who testified at the sheriff’s state trial said the expenses came as a result of the letters.
A deluge of scandals and legal challenges followed in the next months.
Unprecedented purchases — including a new take-home Chevrolet Tahoe, security robots, used golf carts, uniforms and gold-plated badges — drove up the office’s deficit. Montgomery’s administration defended the items as necessary updates for a long-neglected office, but those costs, combined with staffing expenses, drew the ire of the Board of Aldermen, which approves the department’s roughly $14 million annual budget.
When the board appeared skeptical of the sheriff’s expenses, he told the mayor he would stop transporting sick detainees to receive medical care since that duty is not explicitly written in state statute. The mayor and board passed legislation requiring the sheriff’s office to complete such transports and submit to financial monitoring.
22nd Judicial Circuit Judge Joan Moriarty is still weighing the legality of that requirement but ordered the sheriff’s office to do those transports through early next year.
Multiple sheriff’s deputies have filed lawsuits against Montgomery claiming they are owed pay. Montgomery is also under fire for ordering the handcuffing of the city’s acting jail commissioner.
During the trial, more than 30 witnesses detailed Montgomery’s confrontation with Ross. The calls for Montgomery’s resignation began shortly afterward the clash. Spencer and Green later joined in on the requests.
Montgomery faces a federal misdemeanor count in the handcuffing and several felonies for subsequent alleged witness tampering and retaliation.
The Missouri attorney general repeatedly asked Ohmer to immediately remove the sheriff leading up to the trial, but her fourth time proved to be successful after Montgomery was jailed and sent to a lockup in southern Illinois. Ohmer said he didn’t understand how Montgomery would be able to run the office while in federal custody and temporarily removed him.
Montgomery repeatedly denied wrongdoing throughout his time in office, calling the efforts to remove him politically and racially motivated. Hanaway has vehemently disagreed with the characterization.
“We have filed quo warranto actions all over the state — including in very small, majority-white areas — against sheriffs and prosecutors who aren’t doing their jobs,” she told reporters during the removal trial. “We’ll continue to do that wherever we see the taxpayers and the state and the citizens being harmed.”
This story has been updated.
