Editor,
Thank you to the authors of the excellent guest perspective “May oversight of the force be with you” on the effort to enact sheriff oversight for San Mateo County. An effective sheriff oversight program saves lives, saves taxpayer money (we paid $4.5 million for one incident alone), and protects civil rights. Our county supervisors need your support and encouragement to create an independent, empowered and funded community board and inspector general.
I first became aware that the office of sheriff reports to no one and has no boss, when the San Mateo County sheriff and undersheriff were detained at an illegal brothel in 2007. I was busy with work and family, so I didn’t track the outcome, I just assumed that something would be done. Turns out nothing could be done, because the sheriff is accountable to no one. Similarly, no one had any power to help deputies whose jobs were threatened if they supported the new candidate in the election, or when San Mateo deputies were sent to Indiana to arrest the Batmobile maker, or when Chinedu Okobi died at the hands of deputies in Millbrae (Was the deputy training inadequate, did they not follow their training, was he targeted because of his skin color? How did this happen and were the problems addressed so it doesn’t happen again? We had no way of knowing).
I support effective sheriff oversight. I encourage everyone to learn more about why it will make us safer.
Kel West
Redwood City
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(2) comments
Good morning, Kel, and thanks for your LTE.
The Sheriff does have a boss... the voters... and the voters hired a new Sheriff last November. Do you trust their judgment?
I read Yedida and Chowning's guest perspective earlier this week, and I suggested the issue of whether the county should create a law enforcement oversight commission should be decided by the voters. There was some pushback from another DJ reader who believes a ballot initiative on this issue would be a horrible idea. Why? The other reader believes low information voters do not have the time to research issues and "form opinions." Well, if this issue becomes a ballot measure, I'm confident we would see a deluge of information in the media and our mailboxes intended to educate the voters about why or why not an oversight commission should be created.
The unspoken but implied idea that voters are incapable of expressing themselves at the ballot box sounds an awful lot like "Two legs good, four legs bad" to me. So, today... let's just concern ourselves with turkey legs.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Here we go again… I’d recommend folks take a gander and read Sue Dremann’s balanced article on oversight (https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2023/11/02/san-mateo-county-board-of-supervisors-agrees-that-sheriffs-office-needs-some-type-of-oversight). Especially Susan Manheimer’s take on civilian oversight boards. It seems to me that instead of wasting $3.5 million on an oversight board plus funding civilian board members $500 per day, we could put that money to better use. Actually, if civilian board members are being paid $500/day, isn’t that more incentive for these board members to make mountains out of every molehill, warranted or not? More money in their pocket for questionable and potentially political oversight. Here’s a thought, how about an oversight group for the oversight group?
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.