Seven residents were named to the first San Mateo County Independent Civilian Advisory Commission on the Sheriff’s Office by supervisors at its meeting Tuesday.
The commission, established December 2023, was created to increase transparency from the Sheriff’s Office and act as an advisory role to the Board of Supervisors through oversight and accountability.
The seven residents appointed to the inaugural commission include Marco Durazo, James Simmons, William McClure, Rob Silano, Kalimah Salahuddin, each respectively chosen to represent a supervisor’s district. Mike Fisher was chosen by Sheriff Christina Corpus and Shirley Melnicoe was named as at-large member by supervisors and commission liaisons Warren Slocum and Dave Pine. The board also appointed Rebecca Carabez and Alexis Lewis as two nonvoting at-large alternates.
“I know you’ll agree that when you look at the composition of this commission, it’s really diverse in terms of its gender, race, the different communities that folks are from, life experience and different geographical representation,” Slocum said. “I think everyone is excited to start this work.”
The effort to establish sheriff oversight has largely been led by Fixin’ San Mateo and the Coalition for a Safer San Mateo County. Nancy Gooban, executive director of Fixin’ San Mateo, said the establishment of this commission is just the first step.
“You took a historic fist step for oversight,” Goodban said during public comment addressing the board. “Help make sure that they have teeth, a real job to do, and that they can get it done with your support.”
Two areas of concern prompting declared need for oversight include the large quantity of tax dollars spent in payouts, and recent deaths within the county jail. Though efforts are being made to mitigate this concern, Goodban said the county jail has become a de facto mental health or substance abuse facility, and multiple deaths could be attributed to lack of proper treatment.
Sheriff Christina Corpus said she has taken strides “working toward positive change, culture change” by establishing new programs to address these challenges at county facilities.
Recommended for you
Goodban and fellow colleagues held a webinar earlier this month announcing the official establishment of the California Coalition for Sheriff Oversight. Assembly Bill 1185, signed into law September 2020, allowed counties to establish an oversight board of its Sheriff’s Office. The coalition seeks to establish some standardization of how counties can implement this bill over their law enforcement agencies.
Assemblymember Kevin McCarty, D-Sacramento, who authored AB 1185, said at the webinar the accountability demanded by oversight will hopefully help curb bad outcome interactions with sheriff’s deputies. In 2023, McCarty said California counties combined paid more than $100 million to settle liability cases for instances involving matters such as excessive force.
“This isn’t just about holding officers accountable that cross a line, because most don’t,” McCarty said. “More importantly, it’s the tens of millions of dollars that we pay out in taxpayer funded settlements.”
Salahuddin, who will represent District 5 and is also president of the Jefferson Union High School District Board of Trustees, said the civilian-led commission will serve as leaders in representing the minority by holding law enforcement accountable.
“We need support and help and extra eyes so that the things that we’re talking about and the issues that are brought up are dealt with,” Salahuddin said. “This isn’t about being anti anything, it’s about being pro community.”
The commission is expected to hold a public meeting in July.
Note to readers: This story has been changed to clarify a paraphrase. Sheriff Christina Corpus said she and the Sheriff's Office have made positive changes by establishing new programs.
(5) comments
Thanks for the update, Ana Mata. What would be more interesting are the qualifications that these seven residents have in oversight and law enforcement. Hopefully I’m wrong, but as it is now, I see this more as an exercise in obtaining a stipend and making mountains out of every molehill to continue receiving the stipend, as often as possible. The bigger question is whether these members, since being paid by the County, qualify to receive government pensions and benefits – another burden, in addition to this commission, taxpayers will have to bear for likely no value-added benefit.
They are all volunteers, no stipend, no government pensions.
NancyG, you've said this in the past but what's even more interesting are statements documented in a Palo Alto Daily Post article on October 19, 2023 (https://padailypost.com/2023/10/19/sheriff-watchdog-group-wants-a-budget-from-the-county/) which details Fixin’ San Mateo County’s (headed by yourself and Jim Lawrence) draft ordinance proposing to have the county spend about $2.5 million on oversight. Perhaps I missed it but I don’t see this $2.5 million as being from sources other than taxpayers.
Also we previously went over this a few weeks back… Here are two more links related to the commission and as you can see from the first link, there is fiscal impact. The second link reports the estimated $3.5 million price tag (I guess $2.5 million wasn’t enough and a 40% bump was needed), along with the $500/individual/meeting price tag.
https://www.coastsidebuzz.com/san-mateo-county-supervisors-establish-an-independent-civilian-advisory-commission-to-work-with-the-sheriff/
https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2023/11/02/san-mateo-county-board-of-supervisors-agrees-that-sheriffs-office-needs-some-type-of-oversight/
If you have newer information or an official statement indicating there is no stipend and no taxpayer money is being wasted, I’m sure our dear readers would like to verify your statement. My above links challenge your assertion of no stipend. Perhaps you can also provide information regarding no government pensions.
The Dec 2023 resolution is here https://drive.google.com/file/d/18Qi3VDT9rVgFRnaf8DRejeytsppgEv9O/view and yesterday's Board memo is here https://sanmateocounty.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=6719414&GUID=8C5B0405-4B96-4AB2-B6B9-55F1224E3160&Options=&Search=&FullText=1. Fixin' recommended a stipend and hiring an Inspector General but the Board of Supervisors didn't do any of that. If you are worried please ask the county.
Thanks for your response and the links, NancyG, but these two links don’t provide any information on funding. I’m sticking to the information in the linked articles of a $3.5 million price tag unless otherwise informed by a reputable news source.
Since you appear to have the inside scoop, perhaps you can state here, for the record, that this oversight commission won’t cost taxpayers any money and/or there is no individual stipend per meeting.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.