Special Notice / Hearing: None
Vote Required: 4/5ths
To: Honorable Board of Supervisors
From: John D. Nibbelin, County Attorney
Subject: Consideration of Final Decision to Remove Sheriff Corpus
RECOMMENDATION:
title
Consider adoption of a resolution pursuant to Section 412.5 of the San Mateo County Charter and the Removal Procedures approved by the Board of Supervisors:
A) Receiving the written advisory opinion of the Hearing Officer (“Advisory Opinion”) finding that the County had and has cause to remove Sheriff Christina Corpus from office (Attachment A to this Resolution); and
B) Confirming the Board of Supervisors’ independent review of the Advisory Opinion and the Administrative Record and determining, based on a review of the Advisory Opinion and the Administrative Record and by a preponderance of the evidence, that there was and is cause to remove Sheriff Christina Corpus from office; and
C) Making a final decision to remove Sheriff Christina Corpus from office for cause pursuant to Section 412.5 of the San Mateo County Charter; and
D) Declaring that the Board of Supervisors adopts as its own the rationale of the Hearing Officer set forth in the Advisory Opinion in finding cause for removal; and
E) Approving Attachment B to this Resolution (Letter drafted by the County Attorney), which constitutes the Final Decision After Removal Hearing making Sheriff Christina Corpus’ removal final and effective immediately and directing the County Attorney to serve by mail the Final Decision After Removal Hearing on Sheriff Christina Corpus; and
F) Declaring that Attachment C to this Resolution constitutes a true and accurate description of the Administrative Record reviewed by the Board of Supervisors in support of the Final Decision After Removal Hearing.
body
BACKGROUND:
On March 4, 2025, the County held a Special Election on Countywide Measure A to amend the San Mateo County Charter to add Section 412.5, which, upon adoption, granted the Board of Supervisors authority, until December 31, 2028, to remove an elected sheriff for certain enumerated causes (“Charter Amendment”).
The full text of the Charter Amendment is as follows:
412.5. Removal of Elected Sheriff for Cause
a. The Board of Supervisors may remove a Sheriff from office for cause, by a four-fifths vote, after a Sheriff has been:
(1) Served with a written statement of alleged grounds for removal; and
(2) Provided a reasonable opportunity to be heard regarding any explanation or defense.
b. For the purposes of this Section 412.5, “cause” shall mean any of the following:
(1) Violation of any law related to the performance of a Sheriff’s duties; or
(2) Flagrant or repeated neglect of a Sheriff’s duties as defined by law; or
(3) Misappropriation of public funds or property as defined in California law; or
(4) Willful falsification of a relevant official statement or document; or
(5) Obstruction, as defined in federal, State, or local law applicable to a Sheriff, of any investigation into the conduct of a Sheriff and/or the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office by any government agency (including the County of San Mateo), office, or commission with jurisdiction to conduct such investigation.
c. The Board of Supervisors may provide for procedures by which a removal proceeding pursuant to this Section 412.5 shall be conducted.
d. This Section 412.5 shall not be applied to interfere with the independent and constitutionally and statutorily designated investigative function of a Sheriff.
e. This Section 412.5 shall sunset and be of no further force and effect as of December 31, 2028 unless extended by voters of San Mateo County.
The Charter Amendment was approved with approximately 84% of the votes cast in favor of it by the electorate and, pursuant to Elections Code Section 9122, the Charter Amendment took effect on April 18, 2025, which is 10 days after the certified election results for Measure A were approved by the Board.
As reflected above, Section 412.5.c. of the San Mateo County Charter states that the Board “may provide for procedures by which a removal proceeding pursuant to this Section 412.5 shall be conducted[]” and the Board has adopted such procedures (“Removal Procedures”).
The law firm Keker, Van Nest & Peters, LLP conducted an independent investigation of allegations of misconduct against Sheriff Christina Corpus (“Sheriff Corpus”) and drafted a Proposed Notice of Intent to Remove Sheriff Christina Corpus that constitutes a written statement of alleged grounds for removal as required by Section 412.5 of the San Mateo County Charter and that complies with sub-Sections I(1) and (2) of the Removal Procedures.
On June 5, 2025, the Board, in Resolution No. 081187, adopted and approved the issuance of the written Notice of Intent to Remove Sheriff ( “NOI”), initiated a process to remove Sheriff Corpus from office for cause pursuant to Section 412.5 of the San Mateo County Charter, and directed staff to provide Sheriff Corpus a copy of the NOI and its supporting documents, which staff did.
The NOI is a 59-page single-spaced document supported by an additional 524 pages of documentary evidence (consisting of 68 exhibits) and it references 42 witness interviews. The NOI reflects a detailed and thorough investigation into the Sheriff’s actions. The NOI concluded that the Sheriff engaged in multiple acts of misconduct that, if true, supported removal from office for cause under Section 412.5 of the Charter.
As required by the Removal Procedures, a Pre-Removal Conference occurred on Wednesday, June 11, 2025, before San Mateo County Chief Probation Officer Keene (“Pre-Removal Conference”).
At the Pre-Removal Conference, Chief Keene considered the NOI and its supporting materials and gave Sheriff Corpus the opportunity to be heard and he considered the information and explanation provided by the Sheriff. On June 17, 2025, Chief Keene issued a written recommendation to the Board that the Board approve and adopt the NOI and move forward with the proposed removal action (“Recommendation”).
After review and consideration, at a meeting on June 24, 2025, the Board sustained the Recommendation to remove Sheriff Corpus from office for cause pursuant to Section 412.5 of the County Charter and the Board adopted Resolution No. 081291, which sets forth its Final Notice of Decision to Remove Sheriff Corpus for Cause (subject to an appeal via Removal Hearing) pursuant to Section 412.5 (“Final Notice of Decision to Remove Pending Appeal”).
On June 27, 2025, Sheriff Corpus requested an appeal hearing and the County and the Sheriff agreed that the Honorable James Emerson, retired Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge, would serve as the hearing officer. Assistant County Executive Iliana Rodriguez was notified on July 1, 2025 of Judge Emerson’s selection as hearing officer. On July 3, 2025, Judge Emerson scheduled the appeal hearing for August 18, 2025 through August 29, 2025.
Subsequently, the County notified Sheriff Corpus of deficiencies in her appeal and, on July 21, 2025, nearly a month after adoption of the Final Notice of Decision to Remove Pending Appeal, Sheriff Copus submitted a Statement of Facts in support of her appeal. Judge Emerson made a number of pretrial rulings, including an order denying Sheriff Corpus’ Motion to Dismiss and an order denying Sheriff Corpus’ request for a continuance of the removal hearing and for additional hearing days.
DISCUSSION:
The appeal hearing occurred as scheduled for 10 days from August 18 through 29, 2025, with each side allowed up to 35 hours to present their respective cases. During the hearing a total of 36 witnesses testified under oath, 174 exhibits were admitted, and the County used approximately 20.5 hours of its allotted time while Sheriff Corpus used approximately 31 hours of her allotted time. On September 12, 2025, the County and Sheriff Corpus each submitted to Judge Emerson a written closing brief.
Attachment C lists the materials that constitute the Administrative Record. All members of the Board of Supervisors were provided for their review the transcripts of the removal hearing and all admitted exhibits on September 11, 2025. All Board members were provided the remaining materials in the Administrative Record (except Judge Emerson’s Advisory Opinion and the Board Resolution Re Removal) on October 2, 2025.
On October 6, 2025, Judge Emerson submitted a written Advisory Opinion finding, among other things, that a preponderance of evidence presented at the hearing established that the County had cause to remove Sheriff Corpus from office pursuant to Section 412.5 of the County Charter (“Advisory Opinion”). Specifically, Judge Emerson concluded that, by a preponderance of the evidence, the County established four separate and independent causes to remove Sheriff Corpus; specifically: (1) a conflict of interest regarding the Sheriff’s relationship with Victor Aenlle, (2) retaliation by the Sheriff against Deputy Sheriff Association union president Deputy Carlos Tapia, (3) her unlawful arrest of Deputy Carlos Tapia without probable cause; and (4) retaliation against Captain Brian Philip. Further, the Hearing Officer found Sheriff Corpus’ testimony under oath not to be credible with respect to her relationship with Victor Aenlle and her reasons for investigating Deputy Carlos Tapia.
The Removal Procedures approved by the Board provide, as relevant here, the following:
IV. Board of Supervisors Final Decision After Removal Hearing
1. Board of Supervisors Review Period
(A) The Board will have up to 30 days from the date of receipt of the Hearing Officer’s advisory opinion to independently review the Hearing Officer’s advisory opinion and the administrative record.
2. Board of Supervisors Vote - Final Post-Hearing Decision
(A) At a Board meeting following receipt and review of the Hearing Officer’s advisory opinion, the Board must vote on whether, by a preponderance of the evidence, there was “cause,” as defined Section 412.5, to remove the Sheriff.
(B) The Board shall have the authority to remove the Sheriff for cause only if it obtains at least a four-fifths vote in support of removal.
(C) Upon the Board obtaining at least a four-fifths vote to remove the Sheriff for cause, the Board will cause to be prepared the Board’s Final Decision After Removal Hearing, in writing, wherein the Board will provide its rationale in support of its vote. The Board will review and approve the Final Decision After Removal Hearing at a Board meeting, making the Sheriff’s removal effective immediately and final. The Final Decision After Removal Hearing shall be served on the Sheriff by mail to the Sheriff’s last known home address of record.
As reflected above, the Removal Procedures state that the Board will independently review the Advisory Opinion and the Administrative Record and that, after receipt and review of the Advisory Opinion, the Board shall vote to determine whether, by a preponderance of the evidence, there is cause to remove the Sheriff.
As noted, the Board has received the Advisory Opinion and the Administrative Record and the Board has not yet taken action pursuant to Section IV of the Removal Procedures. Staff has agendized the Final Post-Hearing Decision for the Board’s consideration and has prepared a form of Resolution and “Board’s Final Decision After Removal Hearing” to allow the Board to take action if the Board decides to adopt as its own the rationale of the Hearing Officer in finding cause for removal.
The Board retains full discretion with respect to the Final Decision After Removal Hearing and the Board may take any action that it deems appropriate in light of its consideration of the Advisory Opinion and the Administrative Record in this matter, including to vote to remove Sheriff Corpus or to decline to do so.
If, based on review of the Advisory Opinion and the Administrative Record, the Board determines that conclusions different from those reached by the Hearing Officer are supported by the record or that removal is not warranted, the Board can direct staff with respect to such matters and staff will prepare a resolution that reflects the Board’s conclusions and direction.
Action to remove the Sheriff requires a four-fifths vote of the Board.
COMMUNITY IMPACT:
Considering a Final Decision After Removal Hearing, pursuant to Measure A, which was approved by San Mateo County voters, is consistent with the County’s dedication to responsive, equitable, responsible, and accountable government.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no direct fiscal impact to the County associated with taking action pursuant to Section 412.5 of the San Mateo County Charter. However, litigation of any removal proceeding has and will result in significant legal fees and associated costs of a yet undetermined amount.