When your Chief of Police Works For Someone Else

Governance Risk in Contract Cities

By Justin Beaver, Principal Consultant Culper Consulting

For California city managers overseeing contract law enforcement services, public safety governance carries a unique and often underappreciated risk. Unlike cities with an in-house police department, contract cities do not employ a Chief of Police who sits within the organization, participates in internal executive deliberation, or carries long-term institutional accountability to the city manager or council.

Instead, law enforcement expertise is typically delivered through a Sheriff’s Captain, an experienced professional, but one whose primary loyalty, reporting structure, and career trajectory remain outside the city organization. In many cases, that Captain is passing through on a multi-year rotation, balancing the priorities of the Sheriff’s Department, regional demands, and the expectations of the contracting city.

This structure works operationally. It often works financially. But from a governance standpoint, it creates a decision-making gap that becomes most visible during moments of pressure.

City managers in contract cities are routinely asked to make consequential public safety decisions without an internal executive-level law enforcement advisor who understands the city’s political environment, budget constraints, labor history, and risk tolerance. The Sheriff’s Captain may provide sound operational recommendations, but those recommendations are understandably framed through the lens of departmental policy, regional consistency, and operational risk, not municipal governance.

The result is that city managers are often forced to translate highly technical law enforcement input into policy decisions in real time, frequently under public scrutiny, legal exposure, and compressed timelines. In these moments, the question is not whether the Sheriff’s recommendation is reasonable, it usually is. The question is whether the city fully understands the alternatives, the tradeoffs, and the downstream implications of accepting that recommendation as presented.

This challenge becomes acute during critical incidents, mass casualty events, or high-profile use-of-force situations. In the immediate aftermath of such events, cities must make decisions related to public communication, administrative actions, independent investigations, and resource commitments. Without an internal Chief of Police or equivalent advisor, city managers are left to rely on external expertise that may not be positioned, or incentivized, to fully frame those decisions through a municipal risk and governance lens.

Over time, this dynamic can expose cities to avoidable risk. Decisions made quickly, without documented exploration of alternatives or explicit acknowledgment of tradeoffs, are far more difficult to defend later, particularly when outcomes are challenged by the public, the media, or the courts. In California, where transparency expectations are high and litigation is common, the process by which a decision is made often matters more than the decision itself.

This is not a critique of Sheriff’s Departments or their leadership. Sheriffs provide essential services to contract cities and often do so professionally and effectively. The issue is structural, not personal. Contract cities operate without an internal mechanism to independently evaluate law enforcement recommendations at the executive level before those recommendations become policy decisions.

For city managers, the risk is subtle but significant. You are accountable for decisions informed by expertise you do not control, delivered by professionals who do not report to you, and often presented at moments when time and political capital are limited. Without a dedicated governance-focused public safety advisor, the burden of interpretation, translation, and risk assessment falls squarely on the city manager’s shoulders.

As California cities continue to rely on contract law enforcement models, the need for independent, executive-level public safety advisory support becomes increasingly clear. Not to second-guess operational professionals, but to ensure that decisions made under pressure are grounded in clarity, documented deliberation, and an understanding of municipal, not departmental,

risk.

Strong public safety governance in contract cities is not about replacing the Sheriff’s voice. It is about ensuring that city managers are never forced to govern blindfolded in moments that define careers, councils, and communities.

Justin Beaver is the Founder and Principal Consultant of Culper Consulting, an executive public safety advisory firm providing independent decision-support services to city managers and elected officials.