Arizona Sheriff Survives Removal Attempt as Perjury Allegations Get Sent to State AG

Clear Facts

• Pima County Board of Supervisors voted 4-0 to refer perjury allegations against Sheriff Chris Nanos to the Arizona Attorney General’s office
• A motion to immediately remove Nanos from office failed when no supervisor seconded it
• The controversy centers on allegations Nanos lied under oath about his disciplinary history as a Texas police officer in the 1970s and 1980s
• The sheriff is leading the investigation into Nancy Guthrie’s disappearance, which has now exceeded 100 days with few public breakthroughs

A Pima County Sheriff facing mounting scrutiny over both his handling of a high-profile kidnapping case and his past police record narrowly avoided removal from office Tuesday night. The Board of Supervisors instead voted to refer perjury allegations to state authorities for investigation.

Republican Supervisor Steve Christy moved to declare the sheriff’s office vacant and begin immediate replacement proceedings for Sheriff Chris Nanos. The motion failed when no other supervisor seconded it, effectively ending the removal effort.

Democrat Rex Scott then introduced a motion to refer perjury allegations against Nanos to the state Attorney General’s office. That measure passed 4-0, with Christy abstaining from the vote.

“My chief concern with what’s been going on within the sheriff’s department is that our elected sheriff has taken no discernible efforts to repair relationships and trust within our largest department,” Scott said.

“The most telling example of that was the unanimous vote of the Pima County Deputy’s Organization declaring no confidence in his leadership.”

The Tuesday night showdown followed weeks of pressure from county leadership over allegations the sheriff misled officials about his disciplinary record. Two supervisors, Christy and Democrat Matt Heinz, had been pushing for formal action or removal.

“This is accountability for a guy who has evaded accountability for decades,” Heinz told Fox News Digital last week.

“[He’s a] public safety threat.”

The controversy centers on claims Nanos provided false testimony about his employment history as a Texas law enforcement officer during the 1970s and 1980s. During a deposition in a lawsuit, Nanos stated under oath that he had never been suspended as a law enforcement officer.

Records from El Paso, first obtained by the Arizona Republic and later posted publicly by the county, tell a different story. The documents show Nanos was suspended multiple times and resigned in lieu of termination.

Christy said the sheriff had already missed a deadline to answer questions under oath from the board, escalating the situation to the next phase. Because Nanos is an elected official, removing him presents legal complications, though supervisors have pointed to a rarely used Arizona law dating back to the 1800s as a possible path forward.

Heinz noted that even without removal, the board could still take other actions, including passing a resolution expressing lack of confidence or referring allegations for criminal investigation. He also pointed out that a conviction on perjury charges would ultimately force the sheriff from office.

Both sides have retained outside legal counsel rather than relying on the county attorney’s office, a move Christy said is costing taxpayers additional money. In a written response to the board, Nanos pushed back on the claims, arguing the controversy stems from a misunderstanding, not perjury.

His attorney says the sheriff’s testimony referred only to his Arizona career, noting he was never suspended during his decades with the Pima County Sheriff’s Department, though he faced discipline earlier in Texas. The memo also confirms Nanos resigned from the El Paso Police Department in 1982 rather than accept a proposed suspension following a dispute with a supervisor.

Heinz has disputed that characterization, arguing the record shows Nanos resigned in lieu of termination, not discipline. The sheriff declined to answer questions in person under oath, instead submitting a notarized statement to the board after the deadline.

The political infighting comes as the investigation into Nancy Guthrie’s February 1 disappearance has now stretched past 100 days with few public breakthroughs. The case involves the 84-year-old mother of “Today” co-host Savannah Guthrie and has drawn national attention.

The investigation has sparked tension between Nanos and the FBI, including a public clash with Director Kash Patel over whether federal agents were initially sidelined. Heinz has called on the sheriff to hand over the investigation to federal authorities.

“It’s ridiculous,” he said.

“Almost every other jurisdiction would have done so by now.”

More than $1.2 million in reward money is now being offered for information that leads to answers, as her family continues to plead for help.

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.