Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco has filed a claim demanding that the county cover his legal expenses related to his controversial seizure of hundreds of thousands of special election ballots earlier this year. The claim seeks compensation exceeding $10,000 for attorneys’ fees and other costs incurred in connection with four ongoing civil proceedings tied to the incident.

The dispute stems from Bianco’s decision in February, while running for governor as a Republican, to obtain warrants to seize about 650,000 ballots cast in the previous November’s Proposition 50 special election. Bianco said the seizure was necessary to allow deputies to review the ballots for potential election fraud. He secured the warrants from a local judge who had the endorsement of the Republican Party—a judge Bianco had also supported during an election campaign.

The action sparked swift backlash. California Attorney General Rob Bonta publicly condemned the seizure, and in September the California Supreme Court ruled the ballot seizure unlawful. The case raised critical questions about whether Bianco’s actions fell within the official scope of his duties as sheriff.

Bianco’s attorney, Bradley Hertz, argues that because the sheriff was acting within his official capacity, the county is legally obliged to provide a defense and cover the related legal costs. Hertz cited California law requiring public entities to defend employees in civil actions stemming from acts performed within the scope of their employment. He also indicated that if Riverside County denies the claim, Bianco intends to pursue a lawsuit to recover those costs. Riverside County has until December 2 to respond to the claim.

However, members of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors have already expressed reservations about funding Bianco’s defense. In April, the board voted 4 to 1 against allocating funds for his legal representation. At the time, Supervisor Jose Medina stated that the board’s decision was based on whether Bianco’s actions were within the scope of his official role. Medina said the majority of the board believed Bianco had acted outside those boundaries, which justified withholding funding for his defense.

Brooke Federico, a spokesperson for Riverside County, confirmed receipt of the claim on October 16 and noted that the county is currently reviewing its options. The total amount Bianco seeks is still being finalized. The unfolding dispute remains a focal point for local officials and legal observers, highlighting the contentious aftermath of the ballot seizure and its broader implications for election oversight and law enforcement authority.