29,786 / 39.0% Yes votes ...... 46,507 / 61.0% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

Meaning of Voting Yes/No

A YES vote of this measure means:

A majority of "yes" votes would combine the positions of Coroner and Sheriff into one elective office.

A NO vote of this measure means:

A majority of "no" votes would leave the elective offices of Sheriff and Coroner separate.

This measure would amend the Charter to provide for one combined elective office of Sheriff/Coroner.

A "yes" vote on this measure would combine the elective offices of Sheriff and Coroner into one elective office.

A "no" vote on this measure would leave the elective offices of Sheriff and Coroner separate.

This measure passes if a majority of those voting on the measure vote "yes".

The Elections Official has a copy of the proposed amendment which can be provided by mail upon request at no cost. This request can be made by phone, mail or in person.

Currently, almost 75% of California counties consolidate the functions of the Coroner within the Sheriffs office. Many other counties are considering, or moving to consolidate these functions because there are numerous law enforcement and cost-saving advantages. The advantages include:

• Voters will maintain control over this element of our criminal justice system by electing the Sheriff;
• Improved access to law enforcement resources and coordination of efforts;
• Improved efficiency;
• Response time to the public and other law enforcement agencies is improved with the resources available from the Sheriff's office;
• There is no loss, interruption or diminution of service by the Coroner's office.

But more important than the cost-savings is the improved oversight and accountability that will result with this measure. Under the current system, very little accountability exists.

Scare tactics and talk of potential corruption by opponents have no basis in fact. There have been problems in the San Mateo County Coroner's office in the past - but under the old system. Consolidating this function will bring more public scrutiny, oversight and maintain voter control over this office by electing a Sheriff. Opponents simply wish to maintain control over this obscure office without public scrutiny.

Please join a broad coalition of law professionals, medical experts and community leaders in voting Yes on Measure A.

/s/ Michael D. Nevin
President, Board of Supervisors, San Mateo County

/s/ James P. Fox
District Attorney of San Mateo County

/s/ Don Horsley
Sheriff of San Mateo County

/s/ Margaret Taylor
Director of Health Services Agency, San Mateo County

/s/ Robert J. Foucrault
Acting Coroner, San Mateo County

Only the Coroner can arrest the Sheriff should there be corruption or cover-ups. The Coroner is responsible for determining causes of death throughout our County. Jails and unincorporated areas fall under the Sheriff's jurisdiction. Combining these offices invites opportunities for corruption and conflict of interest. Example: A family member is arrested and fatally injured. Who would protect your interest if the Coroner and Sheriff wore one hat?

Proponents claim we'd save $2.6 million over ten years by combining offices of Coroner and Sheriff. That's "peanuts" compared to the $995,000 we'll pay annually for 30 years for the crime-lab voters rejected last November and which they're financing by Certificates of Participation to avoid voter approval. The Sheriff's salary would increase. Oversight and accountability would decrease because he is already overburdened, understaffed and not experienced in Coroner responsibilities.

When a loved one dies, who do you want in your living room offering compassion and information? Sheriff's deputies or Coroner's experts in grief counseling who independently determine cause of death?

Our County Charter prohibits combining these offices. It has stood the test of time. Amending it, would be a dangerous proposition we'd regret.

This Measure is a "power grab" attempting to lessen our control over those who run our government.

Protect your right to a separately elected Coroner. Vote NO on "A".

/s/ Donavon J. Dilworth
Vice Pres. San Mateo & S.F. Counties Funeral Directors' Association

/s/ Lee Bufflngton
County Treasurer/Tax Collector

/s/ Elizabeth C. Moorman
Widow of Coroner Bud Moorman

/s/ James S. Claar
Pres. S.S.F Housing Authority

/s/ James W. McLaughlin
Retired Belmont City Clerk

No effort is being made to combine any of the 15 major department heads appointed by and answering only to the County Manager. The only effort being made is to combine elective offices lessening our control and our right to accountability. Incredibly, our Supervisors, who hold office only because of our fight to elect them, ask us to relinquish our right to a separately elected Coroner.

Thomas Jefferson said, "The best way to have good, honest government is to not trust it all to one but to divide it among the many, giving to each the duties to which he is competent". The offices of Sheriff and Coroner are equally important but totally different in responsibilities. They should not be combined.

By having a separately elected Coroner we are assured of a person accountable to us, with the independence to provide honest information and reliable service, vehemently refusing to do favors for politicians, the Sheriff or County manager in reporting causes of death.

An elected Coroner is an individual we can hold accountable and one we can replace, recall or re-elect. We have an official with authority to appoint medical examiners and personnel to accomplish the important responsibilities of the office and carry on the excellent reputation of the office.

Twice before, voters rejected this same proposal. We are no less wise now. We will protect our right to elect. Definitely No on Measure A.

/s/ Donavon J. Dilworth
Vice Pres. San Mateo & S.F. Counties Funeral Directors' Association

/s/ Lee Buffington
County Treasurer/Tax Collector

/s/ Elizabeth C. Moorman
Widow of Coroner Bud Moorman

/s/ James W. McLaughlin
Retired Belmont City Clerk

/s/ James S. Claar
Pres. S.S.F. Housing Authority

• Improves law enforcement efficiency and effectiveness
• Saves taxpayers money
• Allows voters to maintain ultimate control over the office by electing a County Sheriff

The opponents of Measure A would like voters to believe that this proposal limits accountability. The consolidation of the Office of the Coroner into the Office of the Sheriff will bring increased public scrutiny and oversight, maintain voter control by electing a Sheriff, and save millions of dollars in taxpayer funds.

Today in California, 74% of all counties (43 of 58 counties) operate combined Sheriff/Coroner's Offices. Consolidated Sheriff-Coroner Offices are found in both urban and rural counties such as Alameda County, Monterey County, Contra Costa County, Sonoma County and San Joaquin County.

Only five of us are allowed to sign this argument, but police chiefs and law enforcement officials throughout San Mateo County support Measure A.

Consolidation of duplicate services makes sense, improves efficiency and saves money. Please join your local law enforcement professionals, medical experts and community leaders in voting Yes on Measure A.

/s/ Gary J. McLane
Chief of Police, City of Daly City

/s/ Gary W. Missel
Chief of Police, City of Burlingame

/s/ Mary K. Ganley
Vice President, San Mateo County Deputy Sheriffs Association

/s/ Gregory G. Cowart
Chief of Police, City of Millbrae

/s/ Mark Raffaelli
Chief of Police, City of South San Francisco

(a) That section 407 of Article IV of the San Mateo County Charter be amended to read as follows.

"407. Sheriff-Coroner. The Sheriff-Coroner shall be elected."

(b) That section 404 of Article IV of the San Mateo County Charter be repealed.

(c) That section 411 of Article IV of the San Mateo County Charter be repealed.