San Mateo County Faces Scrutiny as Sheriff Seeks Transparency in Removal Proceedings

Published in Politics and Government on Thursday, August 21st 2025 at 3:04 GMT by Patch
^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors is facing mounting pressure to release records pertaining to a controversial mental health deputy’s removal proceedings. Following a series of incidents involving Deputy Michael Johnston and individuals experiencing mental health crises, culminating in the fatal shooting of Chabria Ellis in 2023, calls for transparency have intensified. Sheriff Luanna Lovell has now formally requested that the board lift restrictions on these records, arguing they should be made public to foster trust and accountability within the community.

The case surrounding Deputy Johnston has been a source of significant distress and concern for residents of San Mateo County. Johnston’s history includes multiple incidents involving individuals in mental health crises, documented through internal reports and citizen complaints. These incidents, often characterized by aggressive behavior and inappropriate use of force, raised serious questions about the deputy's fitness for duty and the adequacy of training provided to law enforcement officers responding to mental health calls.

The shooting death of Chabria Ellis, a 20-year-old woman experiencing a mental health episode, proved to be the tipping point. Ellis was shot after Johnston responded to a call regarding a person behaving erratically in Millbrae. While the San Mateo County District Attorney’s office ultimately cleared Johnston of criminal charges, finding he acted reasonably under the circumstances, the incident sparked widespread outrage and demands for greater accountability.

Following the shooting, numerous public records requests were filed seeking information about Johnston's past conduct, internal investigations, and the process leading to his eventual removal from active duty. However, these requests have been largely denied or heavily redacted, citing privacy concerns and legal protections afforded to law enforcement personnel. The San Mateo County Counsel’s office has maintained that releasing such detailed records could compromise ongoing investigations and potentially expose the county to litigation.

Sheriff Lovell's recent request represents a significant shift in stance. In a letter addressed to the Board of Supervisors, she argued that withholding these records undermines public trust and hinders efforts to improve law enforcement practices. She acknowledged the concerns regarding privacy but asserted that the public interest in transparency outweighs those considerations, particularly given the sensitivity surrounding the Ellis case and the broader issues of mental health response within the county.

"The community deserves to understand how decisions are made when it comes to officers who have demonstrated a pattern of behavior that raises serious concerns," Sheriff Lovell stated in her letter. "Transparency is essential for rebuilding trust and ensuring accountability."

The Board of Supervisors is scheduled to discuss the matter at its upcoming meeting on May 21st. The discussion will likely center around balancing the need for transparency with legal obligations regarding personnel records and potential liability. Legal experts consulted by Patch have noted that while there are legitimate reasons to protect certain information, a strong public interest argument can be made for releasing details about disciplinary actions and investigations involving law enforcement officers, especially in cases of significant community concern.

The Ellis family has been vocal in their demand for transparency, arguing that the public has a right to know how the county handled Johnston’s past conduct and why he was allowed to remain on duty despite repeated complaints. They believe that releasing these records is crucial for preventing similar tragedies from occurring in the future.

Beyond the specifics of the Johnston case, this situation highlights broader concerns about law enforcement's response to mental health crises. San Mateo County, like many jurisdictions across the country, has been grappling with how best to support individuals experiencing mental illness while ensuring public safety. The county has implemented various programs aimed at improving crisis intervention training for officers and diverting individuals away from the criminal justice system whenever possible. However, critics argue that these efforts are insufficient and that a more fundamental shift in approach is needed – one that prioritizes de-escalation techniques, specialized mental health professionals, and community-based support services.

The Board of Supervisors’ decision regarding the release of Johnston's records will have significant implications for the future of law enforcement transparency in San Mateo County. A vote to release the records would signal a commitment to accountability and open government. Conversely, maintaining restrictions could further erode public trust and reinforce perceptions that the county is shielding its officers from scrutiny. The outcome remains uncertain, but the debate underscores the urgent need for ongoing dialogue and reform regarding mental health response within law enforcement agencies. For more information on related topics:

San Mateo County Mental Health Services: [ https://www.smcgov.org/departments/behavioral-health-services ]
District Attorney's Report on the Chabria Ellis Shooting: (Link not provided in original article, but would be a key resource for further investigation.)

N※N

San Mateo County Faces Scrutiny as Sheriff Seeks Transparency in Removal Proceedings