On July 23, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors announced coming changes to their Use of Force (UOF) policies, partially in response to three taser fatalities at the hands of San Mateo County sheriffs in a year, most notably the murder of Chinedu Okobi in October of 2018.
Press coverage: SF Gate: Sheriff Revisiting Use of Force Policy After Taser Death, NBC Bay Area: San Mateo County Changing Use of Force Policy, KPIX: San Mateo Sheriff Revising Use of Policy
The announced changes closely track those in Assembly Bill 392, which after a controversial compromise with law enforcement lobbyists, sits on Governor Newsom’s desk. His signature is expected. A grassroots group, Justice for Chinedu, has been actively watching the County response after the San Mateo County DA exonerated the officers in the Okobi fatality earlier this year.
The presentation from the San Mateo Deputy DA presented the proposed changes on Powerpoint slides. Supervisors (and the public) were told they could not see the actual draft policy until after a meet and confer with the law enforcement unions. Supervisor Dave Pine objected to this. The DA indicated they had worked closely with the ACLU of Northern California. (Oakland Privacy had also sent comments and had offered to assist, but never heard back from the County).
Items of discussion (without access to the actual draft policy) included the authorized taser administration quantity of three sets of electric shocks (which is enough to cause death) and an “exceptional circumstances” clause that waives the policy restrictions without much specific indication of what exceptional circumstances would consist of.
At the same meeting, the County Board passed on consent a $500,000 public health communications and surveillance system. Oakland Privacy suggested that the County would benefit from a surveillance transparency (CCOPS) ordinance.