There shall be created a department of the county, which shall be known as the “office of ombudsman.” The office of ombudsman shall perform the following duties with regard to complaints concerning the sheriff’s department and duties with regard to other county departments and agencies as the board of supervisors may direct:
A. Facilitate Timely Investigation of Complaints. Upon complainant request, the ombudsman, having been selected as such by the board of supervisors and the sheriff, shall inquire whether complaints involving sheriff’s personnel are being investigated in a timely fashion, and will communicate to the complainant the progress of an investigation and its results to the extent permitted by law.
B. Review Complaint Investigations. The ombudsman will review unfounded or unresolved complaint investigations upon complainant request except as outlined below.
C. Select Reviewing Judge from Panel. Whenever a complaint concerning allegedly excessive force resulting in hospital examination or treatment, or, in addition, such other complaints as the sheriff determines may be appropriate for submission to a panel judge, has been determined to be unfounded or unable to be resolved and the complainant requests a review of those findings, the ombudsman shall select and assign a retired judge from the panel of retired judges approved by and authorized by the board of supervisors and the sheriff to review the records in connection with the adjudication of the complaint.
D. Access Within Sheriff’s Department and Final Determination. The ombudsman and judges will be provided sufficient access within the sheriff’s department to be able to perform the assigned functions. The ombudsman or reviewing judge will either determine that the investigation was sufficient and that the findings are appropriate, or will return it to the sheriff’s department with a written explanation as to why he or she feels it is deficient. The sheriff will make the final determination as to whether additional investigation or modification to the findings are appropriate. (Ord. 93-0053 § 1 (part), 1993.)

A. The office of ombudsman shall be under the direction of the ombudsman who shall be a person of great integrity and independence selected by the sheriff and the board of supervisors. The ombudsman shall be an appointive county officer. The ombudsman and panel judges shall not have independent investigative authority and are not empowered to initiate or conduct investigations or interview witnesses. The ombudsman will not become involved in reviewing criminal investigations, nor will the ombudsman so involve any member of the panel of judges.
B. The ombudsman shall refer any complaint of dissatisfaction to one of the judges in any case which represents a conflict of interest to him. In any case in which reviewing a specific case could create a conflict of interest for a judge, the designated judge shall notify the ombudsman to select another judge.
C. The ombudsman and panel judges shall be considered confidential employees and, as such, shall be bound by the same restrictions that apply to employees of the sheriff’s department regarding the sharing or divulging of information relative to administrative investigations or their dispositions. (Ord. 93-0053 § 1 (part), 1993.)

In any case in which a complainant involves the ombudsman in a review of his or her complaint, the complainant must formally waive his or her right to subpoena the ombudsman and or panel judge as a witness in any future legal action involving their complaint, other complaints or the complaint review process. This waiver shall also extend to all files kept by the ombudsman or any panel judge. In performing tasks under this chapter the panel judges are presiding at quasi-judicial proceedings performing quasi-judicial functions within the meaning of Evidence Code Section 703.5. The only public record of action of the ombudsman or any panel judge is the written finding that the investigation was sufficient and that the sheriff’s findings are appropriate, or the written explanation to the sheriff as to why the panel judge feels it is deficient. All other records or communications are to be kept confidential as “official information” acquired in confidence by a public employee in the course of his or her duty and not open, or officially disclosed to the public within the meaning of Evidence Code Section 1040, and the ombudsman and panel judges shall assert the privilege provided for by that section on the grounds that it has been determined that disclosure of the information is against the public interest because there is a necessity for preserving the confidentiality of the information that outweighs the necessity for disclosure in the interest of justice. (Ord. 93-0053 § 1 (part), 1993.)