Review panel has county, deputies clashing
The Bexar County sheriff ’s deputies union and county elected officials are at odds over the creation of a board of citizens that would review complaints brought by the public and incidents in which deputies use force.
On that, the two parties agree. Where they differ is that the Deputy Sheriff ’s Association of Bexar County wants the board to have a more wide-ranging role, allowing members to conduct their own investigations into deputy misconduct and recommend policy changes to the sheriff and Commissioners Court.
“We want a real overview process,” said Ron DeLord, chief negotiator for the deputies. “A process that will give citizens a right to observe what’s going on in the Sheriff ’s Department — on patrol, in the jail and in the courts — and an opportunity to review and make recommendations on discipline and the effectiveness and efficiency of the Sheriff ’s Department.”
Lowell Denton, the lead negotiator for county officials, is adamantly opposed to an advisory board with a larger mission.
“We are not going to agree to have a panel that is going to review and evaluate the operation and management of the Sheriff ’s Office,” Denton, an attorney, said this week.
“If that’s a bottom-line requirement, and you all are never making a deal unless that’s in there, then we are never making this deal. We need to figure out what to do if that’s the case,” Denton added.
The county and the union have been negotiating a labor contract
that, besides nailing down provisions like pay and benefits, would establish the citizens board. On that topic, neither party has budged during nearly two months of talks.
The deputies’ contract expired Sept. 30.
Throughout the negotiations, the union repeatedly has taken Sheriff Javier Salazar to task for his handling of job vacancies at the jail — at last count, there were more than 200 — and mandatory overtime shifts. DeLord thinks the citizens board could play a role in holding the Sheriff ’s Office accountable.
He said the union is willing to make compromises on some smaller issues, but not about the board’s overall mission.
It’s a surprising move, as law enforcement unions generally are resistant to major policing reforms, like oversight boards with investigative authority. And the creation of an advisory board would invite more scrutiny of controversial cases, of which there have been a few involving sheriff ’s deputies.
Most recently, in August,
a Bexar County sheriff ’s deputy shot and killed a Black military veteran in mental distress, drawing criticism from Bexar County Judge Nelson Wolff and Black Lives Matter activists.
The idea for an advisory board emerged in July after several police reform activ
ists addressed Commissioners Court on the need for policy changes in the collective bargaining agreement.
After hearing those impassioned comments, the commissioners approved a resolution supporting the creation of a board of citizens that would review “disputed use of force complaints” and consider “noncriminal public complaints related to law enforcement personnel.”
At first, both sides seemed to agree on the idea.
However, once county officials put forward a formal proposal in early October, the conversation between the county and union heated up.
“The question is, who gets to look at these issues and who gets to have an opinion?” DeLord asked. “We need a real citizen review into what’s going on in Bexar County in law enforcement and detention.”
Proposals differ
Cities throughout Texas have police oversight
groups, and each has its own mandates, responsibilities and investigative powers.
In San Antonio and Houston, the oversight boards review officers’ use of force and complaints about officer misconduct.
Other cities — including Austin, Dallas and Fort Worth — have oversight groups that also start and conduct their own investigations into misconduct claims, review data on department practices and suggest policy changes to the police chief.
A recent study by the Kinder Institute for Urban Research at Rice University evaluated the five boards.
While the researchers declined to recommend which model is best, they found Dallas, Austin and Fort Worth had oversight systems that were much closer to national best practices.
It found the San Antonio Police Department’s board was the least transparent of the five and has no public outreach role. Members
aren’t allowed to gather evidence when reviewing disciplinary cases, interview additional witnesses or suggest policy changes to the chief.
Denton, the county’s lead negotiator, said the SAPD model has worked for more than 20 years.
He said Salazar believes in community input. That’s why he has an advisory board, the Sheriff ’s and Citizen’s Organized for Public Engagement Committee, or SCOPE, that reviews department policies and makes recommendations.
But Salazar opposes an advisory board that could report its findings directly to Commissioners Court, Denton said.
“It’s his authority and his prerogative. It’s not the court’s authority and prerogative to do those things,” he said last month.
He’s also concerned the board would have too many responsibilities.
“If we have a group that has a gigantic agenda, I think that will not accomplish the objective,” Denton said.
“That’s a never-ending task,” Denton said, referring to a board with a wide-ranging purpose. “That’s not going to solve problems and convince citizens that specific issues are being solved and addressed.”
DeLord disagreed, saying the county’s proposal was too narrow. He also said the union didn’t want the board to include “all the sheriff ’s friends.”
“What I set out to do was create real citizen oversight,” DeLord said. “It’s going to incorporate citizen input and recommendations for reforms, not just Joe … got fired and we looked at it and we agree he should have been fired.”
“This is bigger than that,” DeLord said. “We want to identify reforms that would create a criminal justice system that is fair to all.”
The two have found some middle ground, including the name, makeup and selection process for the board. They also agree all board members should take part in at least three days of training to better understand the nuances of law enforcement.
However, they continue to debate other specifics — whether board members will get a stipend, and if individuals who have donated to a political campaign in the past five years can serve on the board.
They also are debating whether people with a criminal conviction could serve.
Both sides have said they will not back down on their overall vision for the board. They will resume discussions next week.
“If the county’s position is that this board be so narrow, then I think we’re going to have heartburn,” DeLord said. “I would tell you go out and do whatever the heck you want to do because we’re not going to sign this just being a review of the deputy only.”