Special City Council Meeting Will Examine Contracting San Carlos Police Services with Redwood City and San Mateo Sheriff's Department

(letter I’ve sent to some on the SC council and Mark Weiss)
I recognize RC (or other outsourcing agency) would have a contract. But there is no way that contract can codify or ‘enforce’ performing the level of police work we have now beyond the most obvious aspects.
Every police depart has a set of standards as to what they tolerate and what they don’t. I lived in Chicago, and whenever you’d drive from O’Hare airport you’d be careful to drive slowly in ‘Stone Park’ because everyone knew the cops were never casual about speeding. San Carlos to me is like Stone Park. Redwood City is not, and that is reflected by their crime rates, quality of life, corruption (re: the Barbara Pierce / Fair Oaks incident) and even home values. Inevitably, police contracted to us that report to the RC command structure will conform to RCPD standards and norms. Giving up our standards to save a few bucks is shortsighted and potentially disastrous to keeping San Carlos a special place, not just another average peninsula town. I do not want to turn SC into RC.
Even with respect to finance, outsourcing often backfires. While RC and others might initially offer attractive rates, we will have no recourse against higher rates once we disband our PD given the unlikelihood we’d re-establish it.
With regards to Fire, I fully support the idea of outsourcing and think it’s an easy distinction to justify. It is hard to imagine receiving a reduction in fire, crisis or health safety with any other department. Law enforcement is a different matter; the degree the law is enforced depends on local issues, politics and caseload – and, again, I do not want San Carlos to share the same least common denominator with RC.

The Sheriff’s Office will hire all of our Officers, and they will patrol our streets just like before. The Sheriff’s Office will follow our orders on how we like our City run. The contract calls for our Officers to stay. Redwood City will fire 1/3 of our Officers. We get the same service, if not better for a cheaper price. The money we save can help other areas of our city.
This is a fact. It is in the contract.

I haven’t been able to figure this out. The SC POA came out against the Sherriff’s proposal and has asked the city leadership to look at merging with another city. Now Redwood City offers us a cheaper price than the sherriff but 1/3 of the officers will not be taken. Why hasn’t the SC POA come out now in favor of the sherriff’s proposal? I don’t get what they are waiting on. It is obvious the city leadership is going to choose one of the proposals, wouldn’t now be the time for them to try to push the council towards a deal that helps them keep their jobs?

I think a certain percent of our police officers will leave the department is “outsourced,” so maybe having all our officers transferred isn’t as important as it seems.
I have a problem with “outsourcing” to any agency. I would like SC to be part of the discussions about “regionalization” instead. It’s really a shame that we’ve pulled out of the fire JPA and are not part of consolidation discussions. The Belmont San Carlos Fire Department has worked very well and could have continued to do so, while bringing in other cities to share the costs. I fear that opportunity is lost now.

That is a good question Rob, maybe because they took the vote before they saw the contract offer from Redwood City, it just came out. Maybe because Redwood City pays a lot more then the Sheriff’s Office, and has better benefits. Which, if we went to RWC we would have to pay more in the years to come. The Sheriff’s Office is looking at a pay freeze for two to five years. Maybe because if the Officers fight every move to merge the city will give up. Nobody likes change like this, but the money it takes to run a top flight Police Force has gone through the roof.
With all the cops being laid off all over the state the idea of our Officers just getting another job somewhere else is not going to happen. Redwood City will fire our Officers, just like any other company that gets taken over, they are down sized, and just out of luck. I do not want that to happen to our Officers, we owe them that much for keeping us safe.
The Sheriff’s Office has contract cities already. If they can keep Woodside happy and the rest of them, they can keep us happy. We are the customer, we make the rules, it’s just that simple. We keep our Officers, but should one quit, retire, or get hurt we can select the right Officer for replacement. In contract cities if the Officer does not “fit” into how the city likes their people, the officer is transfered to another area. We keep our people, our ways, save a lot of money, and save other city services. We are broke, this is a good fix. Maybe we can save our Fire Department with the money we save.

Did I read that post right? RCPD has corruption? The alternative is an agency (SMCSO) whose top leadership (Sheriff Munks and Undersheriff Bolanos) was detained by police in an illegal brothel in a residential neighborhood of Las Vegas. And they were never held accountable for it. What a joke. My first preference is that SCPD stays just that, SCPD. But if we have to outsource I don’t want anything to do with an agency whose top leadership is fine with such hypocris and fells they are above the law, answerable to no one.

Are you kidding me, are you saying the FBI let a small town Sheriff and Under Sheriff get away with a crime? But they have no problem going after Senators, Congressmen, terrorist and so on. You need to get your facts together before you start going off the deep end. That would mean the FBI is also crooked, to join in on this huge cover up that brings in the highest levels of federal government to save our County Sheriff.
Wow! We must have a huge crime family here. Undersheriff Bolanos was the Police Chief for Redwood City Police Dept. for many years before he went to the Sheriff’s Office, that must mean RWCPD are all crooked there because we all know Officers all follow their leaders no matter what, and our former San Carlos Police Chief now works for the Sheriff’s Office running their crime lab. Oh no looks like another crime lord.
Sheriff Munks is running un-opposed for the position of County Sheriff. Not one person anywhere chose to run against this “criminal” who can control the FBI. Not one politician, police chief, or anyone came forward to take an easy shot at the Sheriff’s spot. All they had to do is drag him through the mud to destroy his reputation, but no one did.
They did not, for one reason only your accusations of wrong doing are wrong!!! But, if it makes you feel better it must be because all residents of San Mateo County are crooks because we are all covering up for him.
Or you just have an axe to grind against the Sheriff.

Jay,
Great post. I am so tired of that brothel story I don’t ever want to hear about it again. We have one SC resident who is running for the Board of Supervisors on that issue; he should get a life.

One phone call from RC Councilwoman Barbara Pierce was enough last year to cause RCPD to instantly cave and shut down their DUI sting at Fair Oaks. I like a PD that has the same law for all races and voting bodies. I refuse to stand by and let SC become a place where criminals and illegals feel comfortable breaking the law ala RC.

Jay & Pat B,
The two of you need to check your facts. That is exactly what happened. Do a google search of the terms “FBI, Brothel, Munks, Bolanos” and you will find any number of news articles that can refresh your recollection. What is really disgusting about the entire incident is that no one at the county ever conducted an internal investigation into their actions and they never had to answer questions about their involvement. I guarantee you if a deputy under their command faced such accusations he or she would have been investigated and I am sure Bolanos would have done the same when he was chief at RCPD. Do I have an axe to grind? I guess I do. Sorry if hypocrisy in the top two law enforcement officers at the Sheriff’s Office bothers me. And I’d rather be someone with an axe to grind than a shill for these two, which you appear to be. Stick your head in the sand all you want. You’ll get what you deserve.

Well Dan why didn’t you say you got all of your information from the web. We all know if it’s on the web it must be true. Never mind that all the information is from newspaper articles with flashy headlines, meant to sell papers, cloud your judgment. I mean if a newspaper said it happened that’s good enough for you. Stick to your “guns” Dan; don’t let the facts mess up a good story. Don’t let the fact that the FBI (who’s job it is to police the police) cleared them of any wrong doing right on the spot. Along with Las Vegas P.D. who was also there.
I on the other hand am going with a common sense approach, if they had done something wrong other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time the FBI would have nailed them. With all the different Officers from all the different agencies on scene, there is no way they would have been able to cover up a story like this up. The laughter from the Officers on scene at those two would have drawn enough attention just by itself. If that makes me a “shill” I guess I am guilty.
Here is one more tip for you Dan, when you’re cruising the Web for all of your “facts” stay away from the parts that talk about “space aliens” it could get a little scary for you.
PS don’t forget, we (San Carlos) went to the Sheriff for a bid to take us over, he did not come to us. We asked him for help.

Ok Jay – you win. If major news outlets report it on the web then I guess it can’t be true. And when exactly did you read the FBI or Las Vegas police report that “cleared them on the spot.” Or are you assuming this because of what you learned through the media? Munks himself admitted he was inside the brothel when it was raided and the arrests were made. Bolanos admitted he was waiting outside for them. Only two conclusions can be drawn from this: 1) either they knowingly patronized an illegal brothel; or 2) their law enforcement instincts and observational skills are so poor they had no idea the unmarked house in a residential neighborhood was not a legit “massage” establishment. Neither option is particularly appealing. Just because they were not arrested doesn’t mean they did not do anything wrong. Law Enforcement is supposed to be held to a higher standard, particularly the top leadership as they set the tone/standard for their subordinates. That’s why most of their general orders include “conduct unbecoming” language so that officers/deputies can be investigated and disciplined (if necessary) when they embarrass their department, even if no crime has been committed. As I said above, the real outrage is that there was never any internal investigation. And as I also pointed out I would prefer San Carlos PD to remain just that, San Carlos PD. If we can’t do that then I for one would prefer my city not be associated with Munks or Bolanos. This is not an unreasonable position to take. There are other options available.
Drive on Jay, our city will get what it deserves.
P.S. – we also approached Redwood City for help and San Mateo PD – they didn’t come to us.
I also have to wonder where the info on Barbara Pierce and the Fair Oaks incident came from. You seem comfortable with discussion of that issue but where did the basis for these reports come from? Did you or someone else read some internal Redwood City report or are you relying on the media for what you know. I don’t dispute that its true, I just bet that you and others who latch on to it learned about through media that (gasp) also reported it on the web and with sensational headlines to boot! Therefore, by your logic it can’t be true.

I’m not disputing that Munks and Bolanos did something stupid, I’m just tired of hearing about it. It probably was “unbecoming,” but it’s not worth all the ink it’s gotten. I don’t believe it was worse than reported because if that much got out, the whole thing would have gotten out.

I saw the presentation by Redwood City PD, and the Sheriff’s Office. I pick the Sheriff’s Office. They kept all of our employees, and will keep them working in our City. In addition, one of the City unions asked the Counsel to turn down RWC, and asked to go to the Sheriff’s Office.
RWC said they would fire 8 of our 24 Officers, all of the command staff, along with all non sworn employees. The Officers that stay would be moved around, but they would try to keep a few in place.
The Sheriff’s Office offered way more than RWC, and San Carlos will control how the Police Officers are run, along with keeping the same staff. Don’t take my word for it, you can see it for yourself, just down load the pod cast.
As for the other part of this blog, I never saw / heard of a police report, arrest report, or anything that charged those two with a crime. I still believe innocent until proven guilty, if there was something there it would have come out 3 + years ago. I will not dump on a department of 600 + because of these two.
If we go with RWC our whole department will be taken apart, and people fired. There would be no way to re-gain our agency once RWC has their “fire sale”, so their proposal that in 2 years if we do not like the way they run San Carlos we can just go back to being our own department. This offer seems a little dishonest to me. They know we could not go back without spending millions we do not have to rebuild a department. And once the contract is up, it will be a free for all for what they could demand. Here is the worse part, RWC plans to staff our City with a large amount of overtime Officers. What that means is we get an overworked / tired Officer who probable can’t live without the money. I have known many people in my life time that love O.T. but do as little as possible to get through the day because they are burned out. The Officer is going to earn 180,000 a year driving around our City, doing as little as possible because they are tired?
The Sheriff’s Office has a 3 yr offer (+ a 3 yr exstension) with a cost cap, if any costs go over we would not have to pay extra, the Sheriff will eat the cost, and if it is under we get money back. And if we did not like the Sheriff’s Office it would be easy to go back to our own because all of our staff will still be here. Sheriff Munks said we will have our own “chief” (Capt.) that will report to the city council to make sure the City is run the way we like it. If a new Officer gets moved into our City, and we do not like him/her he would replace them with someone who is a better fit.
If our department has to go, I don’t see a better deal. I vote Sheriff’s Office.

Pat B.,
Fair enough, reasonable people can disagree.
Jay, you and I can jab at and belittle each other for next two months and accomplish nothing. It was never my intention to get in a shouting match when I made my first post, though that is what it devolved into. I think it is safe to say nothing I write is going to change your mind and the same can be said for me. You seem to believe it is a tempest in a teapot not worthy of further discussion, I think it is an incident that was at worst, criminal, and at best, showed a disturbing lack of judgement and an ethical lapse. It should have been investigated by someone in San Mateo County or California. We will have to agree to disagree.
My primary goal was to put the issue before anyone else who comes along after us and reads these posts. I think I have done that and they can make up their own minds as to who has the better argument.
Have a good day and best of luck to SCPD, I hope you stay independent.

Folks still dwelling on the brothel issue need to refocus and look at the issue at hand. Does contracting make good business sense? Yes it does. It saves 2M of which this is a lion’s share of the shortfall we face in San Carlos. Fact, SCPD officers and SM Sheriff’s Deputies go to the SAME academy for basic, intermediate, advanced and supervisory training as do ALL LE personnel. We are not going to loose the “home town”feel. Get over the warm and fuzzies and let’s take some small steps forward. I recommended to some of the council that they outsource ALL city services to private/public, et al contractors. I think Matt Grocutt was the only dissenting vote for contracting to the SO. This does not seem very full of thought.