The end is in sight for the saga of San Mateo County Sheriff Christina Corpus and the move by the Board of Supervisors to fire her.
It was 73 days ago that the board voted unanimously to remove Corpus from office, more than three years after she was elected, and more than three years before her term would expire.
Corpus appealed the board vote and the 10-day hearing into that appeal ended last week.
James Emerson, the retired Santa Clara County judge who presided over the hearing, has 45 days to recommend to the Board that they proceed with the firing, or not. The board then will have 30 days to decide whether to follow Emerson’s recommendation. County insiders think it will not take that long.
When all was said – all the testimony and all the mind-numbing cross-examination – the defense by Corpus, buttressed by her closest ally, former Chief of Staff Victor Aenlle, came down to this: Everyone else is lying, everyone else was out to get me, everyone else is wrong.
This is just not possible. Not when human beings are involved.
At the heart of the matter, as has been the case from the beginning, is Corpus’ relationship with Aenlle, the good doctor. They denied having a romantic relationship. Whatever.
The evidence, and their own testimony, showed that their relationship was extraordinary and far exceeded the normal bounds of employment, even if you are hiring someone who is a friend. As Aenlle himself said on the stand, “Sheriff Corpus and I will be friends till the end.” They simply did not care how any of this might appear.
County attorneys demonstrated the lengths to which Corpus pursued the creation of a high-paying position for Aenlle – the dual role of chief of staff and executive director of the office’s Administration division. She did so despite an independent consultant’s report urging not to combine the two jobs, a section of the report later excised. She did so despite memos from county and office staff telling her Aenlle did not meet the qualifications for the job and the salary she was seeking.
When the county removed Aenlle from his job, Corpus defiantly appointed him to the assistant sheriff job; the same day, a name plate with the title appeared on Aenlle’s office door. But during her testimony, Corpus was forced to admit that Aenlle lacked a fundamental qualification for the job – minimum of four years full-time employment as a law enforcement professional.
To the exclusion and dismay of credible professionals Corpus recruited for her command staff, she ceded massive amounts of authority to Aenlle and had a near-total reliance on him. Testimony demonstrated that Aenlle acted constantly under the authority of the sheriff, speaking for her even in meetings at which they were both in attendance.
Recommended for you
Everything else — the accusations of retaliation, abuse of power, obstruction, and legal and policy violations — grows out of that relationship.
In and out of the courtroom, Corpus veered between victimhood and defiance, and demonstrated a sweeping view of her own authority that was, shall we say, both interesting and revealing.
“God put me here for a reason,” she said in court when asked if she would quit. At a news conference after the hearing concluded, she said, “As the sheriff, I can transfer people for the needs of the organization. I can make promotions. I can hire and I can fire people.”
Not with impunity. Not just because she says so. There are rules that apply to everyone, including the sheriff.
It has been a long, expensive slog. Even now, I am asked whether it would have been better to proceed with a recall. It would have been cleaner, more definite, people say.
But this ignores just how challenging an undertaking it would be to recall someone from what may be the single most powerful position in the county.
A countywide position, it should be noted. This would mean a massive effort to gather signatures on recall petitions, something that would easily cost $500,000 or more.
Who was going to raise that kind of money? Who would step up and make the kinds of substantial contributions to fund the campaign? The simple answer: No one. The Deputy Sheriff’s Association was not a countywide political force. No one else had the stomach or the pocketbook to ante up.
It is a moot question. This is how the board – with overwhelming support from the public – opted to proceed.
And so we beat on, boats against the currents, borne ceaselessly toward our destination, to paraphrase “The Great Gatsby.”
Mark Simon is a veteran journalist, whose career included 15 years as an executive at SamTrans and Caltrain. He co-hosts a podcast/videocast that can be found at TheGamePeninsula.com, and he can be reached at marksimon@smdailyjournal.com.
(2) comments
Thanks, Mr. Simon, for your “As the Sheriff’s World Turns” soap opera recap and your apt, paraphrased, Gatsby quote. It reminds me of another one (I’ll let readers decide who it applies to), “The loneliest moment in someone’s life is when they are watching their whole world fall apart, and all they can do is stare blankly.” Let’s see what the next soap opera twist will be. More lawsuits would be my prediction.
Would it be fair to say Democrats deserve some blame here for switching to even year elections which extended terms for most elected offices? I think Kevin Mullen pushed this. At best this seems to be an unintended consequence of the change. I am wondering what expensive disasters will manifest from the proposed Prop 50 change.
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.