San Mateo County board votes to begin process to remove Sheriff Corpus

The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously Thursday to issue a notice of intent to remove embattled Sheriff Christina Corpus the first step in a process voters authorized through a March ballot measure The board s action kicks off a feasible months-long removal procedure which stems from a -page independent overview that accused the sheriff of misconduct corruption and an inappropriate relationship with her former chief of staff Victor Aenlle The description disclosed last year was led by retired Judge LaDoris Cordell Corpus has denied any wrongdoing and has resisted calls to resign With a club of lawyers by her side Corpus sat quietly in the back of the board s chambers Afterward she advised reporters she had expected the decision They have a motive explained Corpus the county s first Latina sheriff I m standing tall because I know what is right I ve done nothing wrong Crime is down This rhetoric of citizens safety being at vulnerability is an agenda pushed by certain individuals and groups I can t wait to be heard in the appropriate arena She declined to take questions however deferring to her legal organization Related Articles San Mateo County board to consider launching removal process for Sheriff Corpus Investigator clears San Mateo County executive of misconduct in sheriff s complaint San Mateo County to require quarterly reports on big-ticket purchases Sheriff s union accuses San Mateo County of labor violations Former top sheriff s aide seeks million from San Mateo County over firing Corpus attorneys described the process as unfair and vowed to fight it in court Lead attorney Thomas Mazzucco revealed they would at once seek an injunction to block further proceedings During his remarks to supervisors before the vote Mazzucco objected to the participation of Supervisors Ray Mueller and Noelia Corzo who had previously urged Corpus resignation He contended Mueller and Corzo should have recused themselves and noted that without their votes the board would lack the four-fifths majority required to remove Corpus He also declared the county charter amendment which empowers the board to remove an elected sheriff until only became effective on April and therefore cannot be applied retroactively to conduct last year Supervisors did not respond to the objections raised by Corpus legal company during the meeting Under the process outlined in the charter amendment Corpus will have five days from receiving the notice to request a pre-removal conference where Corpus will be given the opportunity to address the statements against her according to County Attorney John Nibbelin That meeting would be held with the county s chief probation officer and recorded unless there is an objection Following that the probation officer would issue a written recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on whether to remove Corpus The board would then meet as soon as practicable to vote on her removal A four-fifths vote would be required If the board votes to remove her the decision is subject to appeal That hearing would take place before a hearing officer and would be residents unless the sheriff requests it be closed Corpus legal club also opposed the inhabitants release of the notice of intent which details the charges against her citing her rights under the Peace Officers Bill of Rights The board granted this request Several residents who spoke during a society comment period called for the charges to be made residents Mazzucco commented the group had not yet reviewed the full document and would release details at the appropriate time Supervisors did not address the constituents following the meeting Tensions between Corpus and county leadership have simmered for months with multiple lawsuits and legal maintains filed by both sides Corpus elected in filed a lawsuit seeking access to documents related to the Cordell account and commissioned a separate review by retired Riverside County Superior Court Judge Burke E Strunsky That review criticized the Cordell inquiry for relying heavily on anonymous sources and unrecorded interviews arguing it failed to adequately assess witness credibility If Corpus is effective in obtaining a court injunction it could delay an already drawn-out and costly process County staff previously estimated the removal proceedings could take up to four months The March special balloting that authorized the board s removal power cost county taxpayers more than million not including consultant fees and other expenses related to the scrutiny according to the county