Oxford is considering replacing its local police department in favor of contracting our public safety and law enforcement to the county. While it may appear cost-effective, it risks a lasting step backward in public safety, accountability, and local independence.
Some decisions a town can revisit. This is not one of them. We saw that with the Strand beach project—an opaque process that led to a decision many now regret.
This is not a critique of the sheriff’s department, but a question of Oxford’s identity and self-governance. A decision of this magnitude should be put to the public and reviewed by a committee with time to fully evaluate all options.
These are some of the many considerations not yet fully explored and questions to be answered:
A Numbers Game – Paying more than we have and saving none
The projected cost figures by the town for the options being considered do not withstand scrutiny. They appear to make contracting with the sheriff’s department seem like the obvious choice—a cheaper option offering more “coverage.”
When examining the details, it seems the opposite.
The town estimates it would cost $646,998 to maintain a two-officer department in FY2027. That is a striking number—but it does not align with recent history. Over the past four years, the department budget—or expenditure—has averaged roughly $320,000 annually, while employing two to three officers.
The estimate to contract out to the sheriff’s department is $341,000, approximately $20,000 more on average than we pay for our own police department. Additionally, we already get county patrolling to supplement and complement our police department as a municipality of Talbot County. We would effectively be double paying in some respects.
“Coverage” or concealment?
How, then, does it suddenly double in cost, from $320,000 per year to $646,998?
The answer lies in how the town invented the term and concept of “coverage.”
“Coverage” is described as the number of hours an officer is actively patrolling. In the contracting plan, sheriff’s deputy time while assigned and on duty to Oxford would count as “coverage.”
Meanwhile, “coverage” for Oxford officers is calculated more narrowly, where only patrolling is counted and on-duty time doing administrative duties, court appearances, and other responsibilities is discounted—even though much of that time is spent within town and with immediate availability to respond.
By contrast, a sheriff’s deputy’s administrative time will occur elsewhere—outside our town, and outside our immediate protection.
An officer based in Oxford is rarely “out of reach.” If an officer or chief lived here, like they used to until recently, even their off-duty presence contributes to community safety in ways that cannot be captured in a spreadsheet.
In short, the value of sheriff’s “coverage” appears inflated, while the value of our own officers’ time is diminished.
The result is a misleading comparison—one that suggests we would pay less for more, when in reality we may be paying a premium for less service.
The sheriff’s department already covers 250 square land miles—477 miles including water. They have many priorities across a vast county. Under the stated plan, the county is expected to absorb Oxford by having the sheriff’s department hire Oxford’s current police officer as a dedicated, “resident” deputy and round out the county’s service for our town with additional shifts of deputies.
We are being asked to believe the department can absorb our town without consequence.
What matters most is response time—the clearest measure of effectiveness. Under this plan, the county would provide a contracted total of just 70 hours out of a 168-hour week. Outside those hours, deputies would respond from Easton or farther away. By contrast, Oxford officers—even when handling administrative duties—are in town and seconds from responding.
I’ve seen why that matters. Last summer, a drunk driver tore across my lawn before heading toward Thompson Road. I called 911. An Oxford officer arrived within 60 seconds and stopped the driver before he could reach Oxford Road. That kind of response isn’t just reassuring—it’s lifesaving.
That is the value of dedicated, local presence.
This issue is not just about speed—it is about independence. Without our own police department, Oxford becomes reliant on an agency whose priorities are spread across a vast region. We risk becoming, in effect, a suburb of somewhere else—without the benefits that come with it.
Public safety is not a luxury service; it is core to what a town provides. Even private, gated communities recognize the importance of dedicated security. Why should a town accept less?
We are fortunate to have a strong and vibrant volunteer fire department right here in Oxford, and no one questions its value. If that department were under threat of being absorbed into a larger neighboring system, the town would rally to preserve it. Why should professional law enforcement be treated differently?
We are told that one option is to restaff and reinvest in the Oxford Police Department. If that is truly on the table, where is the plan? What steps have been taken to make that option viable?
Recruitment has been cited as a challenge. But what effort has been made? When the town hired a town manager, it used a professional search firm and a dedicated committee. Is finding a qualified police chief any less important?
What about incentives? In the past, a subsidized townhome helped attract officers who would live as part of the community. That benefit was removed shortly after the previous chief’s departure just months ago. Why did we do that if we are serious about attracting and retaining experienced officers?
Have we explored ways to offset costs? There are state grants specifically to support and retain local police departments, including one grant which had an application deadline of March 27. Have we applied for them?
Have we pursued every available avenue before considering dismantling a core public service?
A decision already made, except in name?
There are too many unanswered questions—and they are not minor ones. But it seems even with so many questions, we are on the brink of losing our police department.
Once the town defunds our police department and sells off the patrol cars, the weapons, and other equipment, we would need to buy back brand new at a much higher cost if we wanted to reverse a regret. Just like the Strand, once this decision is made, there is no easy way back.
Sean Clements
Oxford
As the retired Chief of Police of the Oxford Police Department, with institutional knowledge and having prepared the Police budget for the late Chief Wally Jones, Chief James Borga and 13 years as the Chief for a total of thirty three years. Those figures quoted from the previous town management, are factually incorrect! I can Tell you that payroll taxes, retirement and other benefits, were Not included under the Police budget items, when reported by the former town manager. I would Suggest the author of this article, contact Town officials with any questions for accurate and correct answers. I would Also say, that the Deputies working in Oxford are dedicated to Oxford during those hours. I’ve known Sheriff Gamble for his entire career and have worked with. He’s dedicated to Oxfords needs for Police service and Sheriff Gambles reputation and credibility is above reproach!
Thank you
I don’t live in Oxford. But I visit there a lot, shop in the town, wish there were more restaurants in the town, and like the place.
Because I like Oxford, here’s my 2-cents: Prior to the 2024 election, the Tablot County sheriff misused his authority in an attempt to pressure election board members to give more power to more Republicans. His claims that Republicans were being dissed were false and he had no authority to intervene. In other ways, he’s not been shy about advertising that he’s a MAGA Trump supporter.
If I lived in Oxford, the Tablot sheriff would be the last person I’d want to control law enforcement. Easy for me to say, but I’d pay more taxes to avoid that. If the sheriff does take over law enforcement, I’ll be sure to take my passport every time I go Oxford, and have someone with me to record in case the a sheriff’s deputy was to arrest me because he didn’t like my looks. Remember, just because you are paranoid does mean they are not out to get you!
No one is “out to get you.” The Sheriff and his deputies are professionals and don’t make arrests based on “looks.” Regardless of what the town decides, Oxford residents will continue to be well served.
Mr. Clements seems to have done the math that others haven’t, and lays out a compelling argument for at least having a more in-depth review and thoughtful community conversation about where it makes sense for Oxford to take their public safety plan and coverage in the future.
The jump from having an independent police department to instead having that policing provided by an out-of-town organization that is headed by a politically elected leader, who happens to indeed be rather political in this case, should give everyone pause.
St. Michaels residents will be watching this unfold with interest, and hope to see engagement with Oxford residents on this topic a priority for their town management, staff, and other civic leaders.
I was pleased to see the Letter to the Editor from Sean Clemeets and agree with his points completely. Having lived here for over 22 years, there have been many changes, some good and some never needed. Unfortunately, many of the changes over the last three years have done more to reflect efficiency without consideration of the full impact to the community. During the last two years, a large number of the residents at town meetings were calling for at least three full-time police officers to ensure 24 hour coverage. There were also cries to make sure that at least one of them lived in Oxford. Over the last 4 years, we have had three Police Chiefs, two of which did live in town. Oxford also started out with three officers that went to two and now there is one. Safety was, and is complemented with two levels of local and County participation. We know that during the late night hours there is a minimal presence of officers dedicated to patroling the extensive territory of the County. If they are on other calls, we also know there will be undue delay for servicing Oxford. I’m sure this is not what we want. We also know that as the County population continues to grow, any additional police presence (and budget) will be determined by the vote of all the jurisdictions, not just the 600 residents of Oxford. We participate but are not a significant voting block. Having served in an elected role in a much larger jurisdiction, I fully understand how difficult it is to reinstate critical services that were eliminated due to political pressures and expediency. Several of the personal services that were part of the Oxford history 22 years ago have disappeared and many of us would say that the village has not seen the planned benefits of those decisions. I hope this not become one of those decisions.