Showers early with a steady rain developing for the afternoon. The rain will be heavy at times. High 59F. Winds SW at 15 to 25 mph. Chance of rain 90%. Rainfall around a half an inch. Higher wind gusts possible..
Some clouds. Low 48F. Winds WNW at 5 to 10 mph.
Updated: December 26, 2025 @ 10:44 am
Christina Corpus
An open government advocacy group is threatening to sue a California county that is preparing to discuss firing its elected sheriff behind closed doors.
San Mateo County Sheriff Christina Corpus has faced calls for her removal since an explosive November report from a retired judge found that she likely violated the county’s policy on nepotism and conflicting relationships.
The report alleged that, by 2024, Corpus had “relinquished control” of the department to a subordinate. That led to a ballot measure last year that voters passed to empower the county Board of Supervisors to remove her from office, which they voted to do in June. Corpus appealed, leading to the scheduled August evidentiary hearing.
As part of the removal proceedings, Corpus’ legal team asked that the removal hearing take place behind closed doors.
“The county should decline,” wrote First Amendment Coalition attorney Aaron Field in a letter to the county Board of Supervisors. “Barring the press and public from the removal hearing as Sheriff Corpus has requested would violate the First Amendment right of access to public proceedings, undermine a panoply of compelling public interests in administering the removal hearing transparently and needlessly shut San Mateo citizens out of a key phase of a process.”
The hearing is scheduled to begin Aug. 18 and is expected to last about 10 days.
CalMatters originally filed a request to open the June removal hearing to the public, a request that was denied. The First Amendment Coalition is making the same request for the August removal hearing.
Corpus’ removal — and her fight against it, including unsuccessfully filing for a restraining order to stop the proceedings — have roiled her department and the community for nearly a year. Several cities in her county have given her administration votes of no confidence, and the unions representing both her deputies and her sergeants have called for her removal.
A San Mateo County spokesperson said the county had received the First Amendment Coalition’s letter and would announce a decision next week.
“The county has consistently expressed its view that this should be a fully transparent process, including having the August appeal hearing for her removal from office be open,” San Mateo County spokesperson Effie Milionis Verducci said. “However, the sheriff has blocked it.”
The sheriff’s department is still in turmoil, most recently when Corpus put a San Mateo County sheriff’s sergeant on leave. That sergeant had testified extensively in (a second county investigation into Corpus). The union representing San Mateo County Sheriff’s sergeants objected, alleging the sergeant was put on leave as retaliation for his testimony.
Corpus denied that her actions had anything to do with the report in a statement posted to the sheriff’s office website on Monday.
“His temporary administrative leave is entirely unrelated to any comments or cooperation he may have provided in the Keker report,” Corpus said in the statement.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Navigating Senior Care, Estate Planning, & Funeral Planning Read morePeace of Mind with a Piece of Cake
Success! An email has been sent to with a link to confirm list signup.
Error! There was an error processing your request.
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(2) comments
Wasn’t one of her campaign promises … “transparency?”
Good luck to advocacy groups threatening to sue for transparency. Is there any reason the process shouldn’t be transparent other than the Sheriff objecting to it? Unless, of course, there’s something to hide from the public on both sides and they've mutually decided to point fingers at each other. With transparency, we'd see this too.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.