County balancing urgency, diligence to remove sheriff

At the Board of Supervisors meeting Tuesday, May 20, Supervisor Ray Mueller said while he appreciates the patience of stakeholders and witnesses on both sides as they await for the removal process to begin, he is “frustrated by the delay.” 

“I’ve been purposefully quiet since Measure A passed to avoid accusations of bias, but this morning I feel compelled to speak,” Mueller said. 

At a previous board meeting, board President David Canepa stated he didn’t care how long the process took, as long as it provided due process. Mueller referred to this comment, and said he disagrees. 

“This process can be both time efficient and fair, fair to the sheriff, but also fair to the employees of the Sheriff’s Office and the residents of this county,” Mueller said. 

In response, Canepa reiterated his focus is on due process. 

“This is uncharted territory,” Canepa said in a statement after Tuesday’s meeting. “All of us on the board agree it should be a fair process.” 

Voter authority

It was over two months ago, on March 4, that voters in San Mateo County granted the authority for its Board of Supervisors to remove an elected sheriff from office for just cause. The public’s vote was in response to personnel in the Sheriff’s Office asking for support. 

Since, county staff is ensuring the process is done so with precision. 

If the decision is ultimately made to remove Corpus through the approved means, and she does not resign on her own in the meantime, San Mateo County will become the first in the state to remove an elected sheriff, setting a hefty precedent. 

In Los Angeles County, a similar charter amendment allowing the Board of Supervisors to remove a sheriff was approved by voters in 2022. However, it has not been utilized. 

The charter amendment in San Mateo County was presented as an urgent response to the unrest within the current Sheriff’s Office administration, but an attorney representing Corpus said that is misguided. A recall effort would have been more appropriate to remove a particular individual, her attorney Matt Frauenfeld said, but a charter amendment has a much broader effect that deserves scrutiny and “should not be rushed.” 

“These removal procedures and this amendment to the charter, is a law of general applicability, so you’re setting precedent for all future sheriffs, all future elected officials,” Frauenfeld said. 

Procedure

With the county’s approval of its removal proceedings at the meeting May 6, it is currently in the process of drafting and finalizing the notice of intent to remove Corpus, which will be presented to the board for consideration at an undisclosed future date. If approved by a four-fifths vote, the notice will be served on the sheriff, which will include the grounds and bases for removal. Corpus will then have five days to appear for a preremoval conference, which will occur before Chief Probation Office John Keene. 

Keene will then make a recommendation to the board, that will then again vote on whether to proceed. A supermajority approval is required for the final notice of removal to be issued. This is essentially a final decision reflecting the board’s desire to have Corpus removed, but she can appeal, which would then trigger the remainder of the procedures for an under-oath evidentiary hearing. 

The hearing is a public hearing by default, but Corpus may request within five days of receiving her notice of intent for it to be closed. 

Supervisor Noelia Corzo has stated previously she and the board would prefer the hearing to be public. 

The under-oath hearing would hopefully occur within 60 days after a hearing officer is selected — which may also take time. The sheriff and the county will get five days to present their case. The independent hearing office will consider the evidence, and issue a fully written advisory opinion to the board for consideration. 

The board will then make a final decision, which will be binding. 

The effort to remove Corpus followed the release of an investigative report conducted over four months by retired Judge LaDoris Cordell that outlined evidence of abuse of power, retaliation and conflicts of interest in the Sheriff’s Office. 

Should Corpus be removed, the Board of Supervisors may choose between appointing someone or conducting a special election, according to the county charter. The successor would serve for the remainder of Corpus’ term, which ends in December 2028. 

ana@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 106