Christina Corpus’ two-year tenure as San Mateo County sheriff has been plagued by dishonesty, conflicts of interest and her creation of a retaliatory and abusive work environment.
Corpus should be removed from office. But reversing the outcome of an election is a serious step that should be done directly by voters at the ballot box or through legal action that provides for due process.
The solution is not to rewrite the county charter to give the Board of Supervisors one-time power to fire just her. That’s why voters should reject Measure A on the special March 4 ballot.
There are already two ways to remove Corpus, or any other local elected official, from office. Corpus’ opponents could — and should — utilize those routes.
Opponents should launch a recall election, used successfully last year in the East Bay to oust Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao and Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price.
And they should continue pressing the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury to investigate and file an accusation of malfeasance, triggering a trial that could lead to Corpus’ removal from office. That was the process that led to the resignation by and conviction of Santa Clara County Sheriff Laurie Smith.
Instead, voters are being asked to approve Measure A, which would empower the county Board of Supervisors, by a four-fifths vote, to remove Corpus from office for any of five different broad and ill-defined reasons.
Those reasons include violation of any law related to job performance, flagrant or repeated neglect of duties, misappropriation of public funds or property, falsification of a relevant official statement or document, or obstruction of any investigation into her conduct or her office.
Corpus need only be “provided a reasonable opportunity to be heard regarding any explanation or defense.” It would be up to the board to decide which violations merit removal and whether Corpus violated them. In essence, the board would serve as prosecutor, judge and jury.
It would be a troubling power grab targeting Corpus. It was county supervisors who placed on the ballot the measure that would give them the ability to overturn the will of the voters. It would apply only to Corpus because the measure is written to apply just to the sheriff and to expire at the end of 2028, when her term ends.
Moreover, Measure A is slated to go before voters in a special election, which is likely to be a low-turnout affair because there is nothing else on the ballot. That’s not the right way to rewrite county rules for removing an elected official from office.
That said, we’re sympathetic to county supervisors’ desire to remove Corpus from office as quickly as possible. They don’t want to sit idly by as the sheriff’s troubling actions further demoralize staff and expose the county to growing legal and financial liability.
That risk was made clear after the county commissioned an independent investigation by retired Judge LaDoris Cordell of complaints from current and former members of the Sheriff’s Office.
Cordell found that the sheriff was carrying on an intimate relationship with her civilian chief of staff, Victor Aenlle, whom she later promoted to assistant sheriff.
“Sheriff Corpus violated the Office’s conflict of interest policy when she hired Aenlle; she violated the policy by having Aenlle directly report to her; and she violated the policy when she repeatedly recommended pay increases for him,” Cordell concluded.
Related Articles
San Mateo County sheriff seeks to block March special election to remove her
Half Moon Bay man arrested on suspicion of stalking woman
San Mateo County on sheriff’s $10 million claim: ‘Baseless and a distraction from the issues’
Bay Area masseur arrested on suspicion of sexually assaulting victim during massage session
San Mateo sheriff seeks $10 million from county
Even more disturbingly, “This relationship has led Sheriff Corpus to relinquish control of the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office to Aenlle, someone who has far more experience as a Coldwell Banker associate real estate broker than he has in law enforcement.”
The two of them are “obsessed with loyalty that borders on paranoia,” Cordell wrote as she recommended that Corpus step down — something the sheriff has unfortunately refused to do.
The issue is not whether Corpus should be removed. “Lies, secrecy, intimidation, retaliation, conflicts of interest, and abuses of authority are the hallmarks of the Corpus administration. … Nothing short of new leadership can save this organization.”
The issue is how Corpus should be removed. When it comes to overturning elections, process matters, which is why voters should reject Measure A. And why supervisors and other elected officials in the county should throw their political weight behind a recall campaign as quickly as possible.
