|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors has launched the process to remove embattled Sheriff Christina Corpus from her office – a power granted by a ballot measure that voters passed earlier in the year.
During a special meeting on Thursday, June 5, the five-member board unanimously approved the “Notice of Intent to Remove” the sheriff after deliberating for about an hour in closed session. The supervisors returned to open session to vote.
Although supervisors have formally set a path toward the sheriff’s removal, Board President David Canepa told the Pulse after the meeting that the process is just beginning.
“People need to recognize there are more steps,” Canepa said. “This is not the final conclusion. We haven’t removed her. Today just initiates the process.”
The Notice of Intent (NOI) has yet to be made public because Corpus has objected to its release, the county said in a news release, but it’s a 59-page document that includes the reasons for considering the sheriff’s ouster and calls for her to appear at a pre-removal conference expected before the end of next week.
At this conference, the county said, Corpus will have the chance to respond to the charges in the NOI. Among the allegations are flagrant and repeated neglect of a sheriff’s duties and obstruction of an investigation into her conduct.
The NOI largely stems from a 408-page report from a county-commissioned independent investigation last year that lays out corruption, abuse of power and other violations in Corpus’ administration.
Following that report, supervisors approved placing Measure A on a special ballot election in March, seeking to amend the county charter to allow them until the end of 2028, which coincides with the expiration of Corpus’ six-year term, to fire her with cause by a four-fifths vote. The measure passed overwhelmingly with 84% of the votes in favor.
During public comments before the board deliberated and voted on the NOI, Corpus’ legal team lambasted the county’s effort to oust the sheriff.
“This matter started out as political,” Corpus lead attorney Thomas Mazzucco said, addressing the board. “Then it got personal. I’m now asking you to be practical and follow the law.”
Among his concerns about the removal process, Mazzucco raised the issue of prejudgment bias on the part of the board.
Supervisors Noelia Corzo and Ray Mueller have made previous public statements indicating they’re “finding guilt without looking at the evidence,” Mazzucco contended. “They’ve already prejudged the evidence. That’s not the jurisprudence we’re used to. You are now acting in a quasi-judicial capacity.”
Because of this, Mazzucco believes Corzo and Mueller would have to drop out of the process. “You can’t get four-fifths of a vote when two of you will be recused,” Mazzucco said.
Mazzucco also argued that because Measure A election results were certified in April, supervisors could only bring allegations against the sheriff from that point.
“I didn’t really understand that,” Canepa told the Pulse, regarding Mazzucco’s cutoff contention.
As for Mazzucco’s bias argument against Corzo and Mueller, Canepa said: “We’re going through this process – all five of us. The process established involves Corzo and Mueller.”
Among other public commenters, Thursday was Vanessa Lemus-Tapia, daughter of Carlos Tapia, president of the San Mateo County Deputy Sheriff’s Association union, which has clashed with Corpus.
“I once believed in Sheriff Christina Corpus’ promises of accountability, transparency and integrity – values she campaigned on,” Lemus-Tapia said, addressing supervisors. “But transparency and integrity are not just campaign slogans or promises, they are commitments to the people, and Sheriff Corpus has failed to uphold them.”
Lemus-Tapia also criticized the NOI for not being made public.
“With all due respect, it is unacceptable that (Corpus) was given the option to keep the Notice of Intent document private,” Lemus-Tapia said. “No elected official under investigation for misconduct should be allowed to decide what the public gets to see.”
Jim Lawrence, board chair of the civilian watchdog group Fixin’ San Mateo County, expressed similar sentiments. “I am disappointed that the sheriff sought to keep (the NOI) out of the public eye,” Lawrence said in a news release. “With this secrecy, we don’t know what the supervisors voted on (Thursday). The public deserves transparency.”
During the board meeting, County Attorney John Nibbelin explained that keeping details of the NOI from the public at this time reflects “an abundance of caution” given various legal matters pertaining to “the privacy of peace officer personal records.”
But the NOI would be released to the public “at the end of the entire administrative process,” Nibbelin said.
For now, he said, that process heads to the pre-removal conference, after which the presiding officer “would provide the board with a written recommendation regarding whether to remove the sheriff.”
The board would “meet as soon as practicable thereafter to render its decision,” he said. “Any action to remove the sheriff would require a four-fifths vote at that time. A vote to remove the sheriff would be subject to appeal by the sheriff.”
An appeal hearing would then take place, at which the public could attend, unless the sheriff requests that it be closed, Nibbelin said.
Corpus previously told the Pulse that she has no plans to leave office. “I will fight this injustice and not resign,” the sheriff had said.
Corpus has filed a $10 million lawsuit against the county, alleging that she has suffered discrimination and harassment.
