Council approves San Mateo County sheriff contract, accepts $200,000 county credit after staff audit

The Woodside Town Council on Sept. 9 authorized Mayor Domkowski to sign a five‑year law enforcement services agreement with the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office and accepted a memorandum of understanding that grants the town a $200,000 credit tied to contract accounting issues identified by staff.

Town Manager Jason Ledbetter told the council that staff had found a roughly $100,000 overcharge in the previous contract’s spreadsheet entries stemming from a service row that no longer existed, and county administrators agreed to provide a $200,000 credit to reconcile the current year and make both the sheriff’s and town budgets whole.

Council approved the resolution authorizing the law enforcement contract (term: July 1, 2025–June 30, 2030) and separately accepted the county MOU by roll‑call votes. The votes were recorded as: Council member Abarish — yes; Council member Brown — yes; Council member Gold — yes; Mayor Domkowski — yes. Council member Wall was absent.

Ledbetter walked the council through historical and projected cost trends. He said the contract has risen in recent years — roughly a 7% annual trend since 2022 per town projections — and that the town’s revenue assumptions do not match that escalation. Ledbetter provided an internal budget projection showing a hypothetical budget gap of about $327,000 in 2027 and a larger accumulated shortfall in future years if the trend continues.

Key service components described in the staff briefing: Woodside funds a mix of positions in the county contract, including daytime and nighttime patrol equivalents (two deputies allocated for daytime coverage and two for nighttime coverage, with scheduling overlap to cover vacation and other absences), two motorcycle enforcement positions with overlapping schedules, 50% of an investigative detective, 25% of an administrative sergeant and 25% of a captain. Ledbetter also noted that an annual negotiated cap of 7% that had previously limited increases is no longer part of the county’s offered terms.

Council members and staff discussed management and oversight of the contract. Council members asked for closer tracking of actual staffing on duty versus paid positions and for staff to work with the sheriff’s office to ensure deputies paid for in the contract are present and performing the expected duties. Town staff said they will pursue closer contract administration and return with options.

Council members and the town manager also discussed long‑term revenue options to cover structural cost increases, including exploring a voter measure. Ledbetter said staff would prepare options — such as sales tax, parcel tax or other revenue mechanisms — and present pathways, costs and legal considerations for council review if members want to pursue new revenues.

Why it matters: The contract funds the town’s primary policing presence. Sustained contract inflation without matching revenue growth could require service reductions, new local revenue or other changes in the town’s public‑safety approach.

What’s next: The town manager will pursue improved contract monitoring with the sheriff’s office, return to council with options to address projected funding gaps and report on any steps needed to operationalize the $200,000 credit from the county MOU.