Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sheriff Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors accept budget analyst package, approve overtime reductions tied to Prop J contingency
Summary
After a lengthy debate about Prop J and jail staffing, the committee approved a set of budget analyst recommendations including a targeted overtime reduction (about $752,000) focused on San Bruno custody facilities; supervisors recorded a roll call and the motion passed.
The Budget & Finance Committee on Tuesday approved the budget analyst’s package that includes a targeted overtime reduction for the Sheriff’s Department tied to operational assumptions about Prop J, the ballot measure that would change hospital posting arrangements and return deputies to jail duties if approved.
Sheriff Mike Hennessy told supervisors that if Prop J passes, 22 deputy sheriffs stationed in hospital units would return to the department, reducing overtime and the number of recruits the Sheriff would otherwise send to the academy; if Prop J fails, his office estimates the Health Department would require roughly $2.8 million to keep current sheriff‑administered services in place, and the sheriff’s overtime needs would rise. Controller staff estimated Prop J revenue for the city in a range of about $2.5 million to $3.6 million.
Budget analyst Bruce Robertson presented an overtime analysis focused on the two San Bruno custody facilities (CJ5 and CJ5 West). Using recent audited pay rates and population trends, the analyst proposed a reduction of about $752,000 in custody overtime tied specifically to those facilities while noting broader departmental overtime totals are larger: transcripts contain figures cited in committee of roughly $6.2 million for custody overtime in the budgeted year and an $8.6 million custody overtime budget line for the coming year, with some speakers noting actual overtime expenditures this year could be significantly higher.
Supervisors debated whether to accept the analyst’s recommended reduction or increase it to $1 million; concerns centered on the risk of supplementals if operational assumptions (such as Prop J passage or jail population) change. After discussion, the committee took a roll call vote on the analyst package. The roll‑call recorded individual votes (Supervisor Ellsberg: no; Supervisor Mercarimi: aye; Supervisor Daly: aye; Supervisor Chu: no; Supervisor Goldrick: aye) and the motion passed.
What’s next: The sheriff and budget staff will continue to monitor Prop J outcomes and staffing implications; supervisors left open the possibility of supplemental requests if actual operational conditions diverge from the assumptions underlying the reduction.
