|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
In a historic and unanimous vote, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday removed Christina Corpus from her position as sheriff, effective immediately.
Corpus’ Undersheriff, Dan Perea, will temporarily “discharge the duties of the sheriff, ” according to the county charter.
Perea issued a statement following the removal.
“The San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office wishes to assure our communities that our public safety service remains constant and uninterrupted,” Perea said. “The Sheriff’s Office remains dedicated to protecting lives and property and is committed to providing the highest level of professional law enforcement and correctional services.”
Before the final vote, District 3 Supervisor Ray Mueller, who didn’t offer any personal commentary, defended his vote as “solely and entirely based on admin record.” He asked County Attorney John Nibbelin whether he or Supervisor Noelia Corzo were in legal conflict to take action on a decision on Corpus, to which Nibbelin replied that no one on the board was in conflict.
Corzo, who, along with Mueller, was among one of the first supervisors to speak out against Corpus in 2024.
On Tuesday, she said that she had given Corpus the “benefit of the doubt” and called the removal process a “fair procedure.”
“Corpus has had more than enough time. She was not able to provide anything but empty words,” Corzo said. “I want to acknowledge the deep harm this has caused in our community. I take responsibility for misguiding our community.”
“Repugnant and Corrupt”
While voting, Corzo also asked Corpus’ attorneys to return the challenge coin Corpus gave her years ago.
Supervisor Jackie Speier called Corpus’ actions while in office “nothing short of repugnant and corrupt.”
The Board must either appoint her successor within 30 days or call for a special election, according to the county charter.
Corpus appeared at the meeting Tuesday alongside her legal team. The board chambers quickly filled with sheriff’s deputies, county staff and members of the public.
The special meeting follows the release of a nonbinding advisory opinion from retired Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Emerson, who oversaw a two-week public hearing in August regarding the allegations against Corpus.
In his Monday, Oct. 6 opinion, Emerson concluded that the county has cause to remove the sheriff based on four findings, including conflict of interest, retaliation and misuse of authority. Corpus has denied wrongdoing.
Conviction, not convenience
Corpus took the podium at one point to defend herself, speaking directly to the community, asking them to “remember why you serve, you serve the constitution, not the convenience of politicians.”
“Serve justice without fear or favor. I have sacrificed my peace, my marriage and precious time with my children and family for this mission because I believe in justice,” Corpus said. “I was offered the chance to walk away quietly, to take a payout and disappear.”
“Leadership isn’t about convenience, it’s about conviction,” she added.
Speaking on her behalf, Corpus’ attorneys told the board that when she was voted in, she had promised 21st-century policing and that the community would have a seat at the table.
Attorneys argued that the individuals seeking to remove Corpus do not represent the community.
“There’s a difference between amplitude and numerousity; you’re hearing from loud folks,” one attorney said. “They don’t represent the community.”
Attorneys also argued that the board is establishing “a precedent that’s very dangerous.”
“The defining principle is you wanted to create a provision that would establish the lowest possible bar for removal,” the attorney added.
Corpus has denied wrongdoing and has not publicly commented on the advisory opinion. In August, she told board members she had “fought tooth and nail” to get where she is and that she acted with integrity.
The controversy has deeply divided the Sheriff’s Office and sparked calls for reform. Outside the chambers before Tuesday’s meeting, Redwood City resident Martin Elliot said he’s been following the case closely and has concerns about how the department is being run.
“There’s been a lot of damage to the morale of the department,” Elliot said. “It’s a system of who you like, who’s on my side.” He added that he’d like to see the office become more merit-based.
Elliot also said he believes the acting sheriff should have no ties to Corpus and that the board should appoint a temporary replacement before holding a special election.
The board’s authority to consider removal stems from Measure A, a voter-approved charter amendment passed in March that temporarily grants the board the power to remove an elected sheriff for cause.
“A sheriff you can trust”
Corpus campaigned heavily in 2022 on the idea that her administration would be one of integrity.
Corpus made history as the county’s first Latina sheriff and one of two Latinas elected as sheriffs in California in 2022. She launched her campaign with the slogan, “a sheriff you can trust.”
Running against then-Sheriff Carlos Bolanos, her boss, who had been sheriff since 2017, she was careful not to criticize him and knew that running for office would be risky.
“Actions speak louder than buzzwords…And accountability starts at the top,” she said at the time.
Bolanos, whose tenure was marred by his own administration’s controversies, was appointed by a 3-2 vote, following Greg Munks’ early retirement. Munks’ tenure had also been tumultuous. Bolanos was officially elected in 2018.
Corpus received her master’s degree in law enforcement and public safety leadership at the University of San Diego.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.
I find it funny to hear her say that the politicians don’t speak for the community. Well the community voted overwhelmingly, more than 80%, to remove her from office. That comes loud and clear from the people that she claims we’re not being represented in this hearing. We were being represented and the Board of Supervisors did exactly what the vast majority of us wanted. Let’s move forward with a much better Sheriff and a much better Sheriff’s Department.
Her job didn’t ruin her marriage; her infidelity did. You don’t “play footsies” with a fellow employee, especially when they are your subordinate, then give them a position they are not qualified for; then give them a raise; then a different, made-up position when they are found unqualified; then go to Hawaii with them and call it the fault of “the good-old boys”; then blame the County Manager for asking if something is going on with a fellow employee, when it’s their job to follow-up on complaints. Stop playing the victim and quit hiding behind the “a woman of color” argument. It’s the Peter Principle all over again: you have risen to the point of your incompetence. I hope the County can go forward after this and find a good replacement.