The Pima County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday declined to advance a motion to remove Sheriff Chris Nanos from office, rejecting an effort that two supervisors had pledged to pursue if he did not resign. The motion to vacate the sheriff’s office, brought by Supervisor Steve Christy, failed to gain a second and therefore did not move forward.
Instead, the board approved a separate measure to refer allegations that Nanos committed perjury to the Arizona attorney general. Supervisor Matt Heinz seconded that referral and, citing legal advice, said the board would remain neutral as a body while the state reviews the matter. Fellow Democrat Rex Scott urged letting the immediate removal effort lapse while voicing continuing concerns about the sheriff’s ability to restore trust within his department: "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," he said after the vote.
Public comment filled the meeting room as residents weighed in on the sheriff and the handling of the high-profile missing person investigation. The board’s action on May 12, 2026, ended an escalating standoff between Nanos and some county leaders over whether he had misled officials about past disciplinary actions.
A member of the public addresses the Pima County Board of Supervisors during a hearing where supervisors dismissed a motion to vacate the sheriff’s office and voted to refer perjury allegations to the state attorney general.
The perjury claims stem from a 2024 lawsuit in which Nanos was asked whether he had ever been suspended during his law enforcement career; he answered "no." Records and a memorandum submitted to the board by Nanos’ attorney, James Cool, indicate he had been suspended multiple times while with the El Paso Police Department and resigned in 1982 "in lieu of disciplinary action" after a dispute with a supervisor. Cool has said the negative answer reflected a misunderstanding and that Nanos was referring to his Arizona record rather than incidents from more than four decades ago in Texas.
Nanos did not appear at Tuesday’s hearing and instead provided a notarized written statement after the board’s deadline for in-person testimony, a move that raised objections from some supervisors. Christy said the sheriff had already missed a board request to answer questions under oath, and both sides have retained outside counsel rather than relying on the county attorney’s office, a choice supervisors warned is adding costs for taxpayers. Removal of an elected sheriff would be legally complex; supervisors have pointed to an old Arizona law dating to the 1800s as one potential, but rarely used, option.
The sheriff also faces scrutiny over his handling of the investigation into Nancy Guthrie’s disappearance. The search for the mother of NBC "Today" host Savannah Guthrie has surpassed 100 days with few public breakthroughs, and the case has led to public tension between the sheriff’s office and federal authorities, including a public dispute with FBI leadership. Heinz urged that the investigation be turned over to federal agents, saying, "It's ridiculous. Almost every other jurisdiction would have done so by now."
More than $1.2 million in reward money has been offered for information related to the case as Guthrie’s family continues to press for answers. The board’s votes closed one chapter in an intense local debate over the sheriff’s conduct while setting in motion a formal referral to the state attorney general for potential criminal investigation into whether Nanos lied under oath.
Pima County sheriff reacts at a Feb. 5, 2026 press conference about the Nancy Guthrie search, a moment that has come under scrutiny amid perjury allegations and calls for his removal.