The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors held a special session this week to discuss the possibilities of a civilian oversight committee of the Sheriff’s Office.

Although a vote on the potential oversight committee did not take place, supporters of the idea as well as detractors spoke during the special session.

Supporters pointed to neighboring counties such as Santa Clara County and San Francisco County creating similar entities that they feel reassure the public that the office is held accountable, while those against the proposal pointed to the cost of the committee and existing agencies which they say do similar oversight.

Assistant County Attorney David A. Silberman, who represents the Sheriff’s Office, spoke about the different existing laws and entities related to oversight such as the attorney general, which investigates officer involved shootings, and the district attorney, who can prosecute officers if they feel they have a case against misconduct. He referenced a case in which the district attorney investigated an officer that struck a handcuffed suspect earlier this year. Silberman added that the media holds the Sherrif’s department accountable, and the office receives an “overwhelming” number of public records requests from the media.

“Rather than focus on what we find troublesome about some forms of oversight, I want the community to know what we do support and what we already are doing without any need for formal, ineffective, and costly bureaucratic layers.” San Mateo County Sheriff Christina Corpus

Silberman also spoke about Senate Bill 2, which was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and  which Silberman said created a new police officer standards office staffed by 32 investigators that will look into claims of serious misconduct with a nine-person board.

San Mateo County Sheriff Christina Corpus echoed Silberman. 

“Rather than focus on what we find troublesome about some forms of oversight, I want the community to know what we do support and what we already are doing without any need for formal, ineffective, and costly bureaucratic layers,” she said in a press release Monday. 

“The estimated costs associated with oversight exceed $3.2 million,” said Corpus, “hindering the programs and resources available to the communities we serve.”

Collaboration over combative relationship

Those critical of the committee pointed to the CARE (Community Advisors for Responsible Engagement) program that Corpus launched earlier this year, which seeks residents to make up 15-person advisory forums in three regions of the county to offer feedback.

However, several proponents in attendance felt an oversight committee could fill in the gaps that existing entities aren’t able to.

“I am a firm believer that doing it with law enforcement instead of to law enforcement leads to more effective oversight.” Cameron McEllhiney, NACOLE executive director

“Civilian oversight agencies are free from real or perceived biases,” said Cameron McEllhiney, executive director of NACOLE (National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement), an organization that supports civilians oversight entities across the nation. She added that civilian oversight provides an independent and neutral body and as such offers unique accountability that internal entities cannot. 

“I am a firm believer that doing it with law enforcement instead of to law enforcement leads to more effective oversight,” she added, stressing the need for collaboration rather than a combative relationship.

Jim Lawrence, chair of Fixin’ SMC, a grassroots organization also calling for independent oversight, called the vote one of the most important in the county’s history, citing that African Americans are 17 times more likely to experience force from officers than whites, and Hispanics are twice as likely in the county.

Also in favor of the proposal was Ekene Okobi, whose brother Chinedu Okobi died after Sheriff’s deputies tased him in 2018 and led to the county paying out a $4.5 million settlement earlier this year. Okobi asked if the county was willing to wait for another such case to occur before taking action.

“I am a supporter of robust, as robust as possible, oversight of the Sheriff’s Department,” she added.

Concerns over ‘additional bureaucracy’

Other speakers felt adding an additional agency might actually complicate attempts at accountability.

Carlos Tapia, President of the San Mateo County Deputy Sheriff’s Association, the union, said, “we understand the need for transparency and oversight, but the good news is there is no need for additional oversight because of preexisting organizations.” 

Tapia mentioned the possibility that staffing issues the office faces will be exacerbated with the oversight committee due to fears of political agendas and over scrutiny.

“I think at some point the piling on becomes itself an obstruction to the reforms you’re looking for,” said Susan Manheimer, a former chief of police for the city of San Mateo, concerned about the “additional bureaucracy”.

“Let us work together to find a solution that works for San Mateo County,” Corpus said at the board meeting.

A final vote on the creation of the civilian oversight committee is expected to take place during a November board meeting.