Sheriff defends deputies, contract
by Nick Rappley | Patterson Irrigator
Nov 07, 2013 | 2124 views | 0 0 comments | 24 24 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Stanislaus County Sheriff Adam Christianson stood behind the work of his deputies and the ongoing contract with the City of Patterson for police services again this week, defending their work and calling into question a $37,000 study by the city.

The study, performed by Matrix Consulting of Palo Alto, called into question some of the contracting policies between the city of Patterson and the Stanislaus County Sheriff Department when they utilized other resources that compared contracts with other cities for police services.

Christianson, who spoke at the meeting of October 22 when the study’ conclusions were presented to the council, defended the contract and his deputies again Tuesday, Nov. 5.

He stated that Richard Brady, president of Matrix Consultants, had never met with the sheriffs about the police services contract, or gone over costs with the sheriff’s business management team.

“You can’t judge the level of service we provide without talking to me,” Christianson said this week.

“We are as committed as ever to providing an effective level of service to the people of Patterson.”

Christianson said the numbers in the report were inaccurate and that they needed to be corrected for city council members to make a proper decision.

Council members gave direction to city staff to correct any inaccuracies in the report October 22 and asked the city to continue pursuing a contract for police services with the Sheriff’s Department.

Mayor Luis Molina deferred questions about the report to Patterson Police Chief Tori Hughes, who was out of town on assignment this week and unable to answer questions.

The study outlined the cost of the city contracting with other agencies for services, or opting to stick with its own police department. The study also identified what the consultants deemed as inefficiencies within Patterson Police Services, as well as the current contract with Stanislaus County.

Brady stated the one-time transition costs of going with its own department at $1.3 million, identified areas where deputies could be more efficient with more supervision and laid out the cost comparison of utilizing services from Modesto Police, Turlock Police, Newman Police and the Sheriff’s Department.

Comparing the other departments with the sheriff’s contract, the study indicated that contracting with Modesto Police for the same structured police force, which currently costs the city $3.6 million, would cost $4.3 million, while partnering with Turlock Police would cost $3.7 million and $3.5 million with Newman police. The costs do not include transition costs.

The study also indicated that the city should eliminate one detective position, stating detective caseloads were too light. It would leave three detectives and hire two more sergeants for the night shift for better supervision during graveyard hours.

City Manager Rod Butler said the city would be recommending the addition of the two sergeants for better supervision and it was up to the council to set a timetable as to when to implement those recommendations.

The report also stated that there are no current targets by Patterson Police Services for the division of time by deputies between proactive—or crime prevention—and reactive, or responding to crimes.

Departments should strive to have 50 to 60 percent of the time spent in reactive mode and 40 to 50 percent of the time spent in proactive mode, according to the study.

The study indicated that during what is considered graveyard shift— midnight to 8 a.m., — deputies, who utilize a sergeant from the main office of the Sheriff’s Department in Modesto for supervision, were inefficient in their use of time. According to the study, Patterson Police Service deputies had 67 percent of their time in proactive mode from midnight to 4 a.m. and 77 percent in proactive mode from 4 a.m. to 8 a.m.

Nick Rappley can be reached at 892-6187, ext. 31 or

Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet

We encourage your online comments in this public forum, but please keep them respectful and constructive. This is not a forum for personal attacks, libelous statements, profanity or racist slurs. Readers may report such inappropriate comments by e-mailing the editor at