When a grand jury accuses your county sheriff, something is deeply broken.
The accusations against Sheriff Christina Corpus by the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury is not just an individual crisis — it’s the culmination of years of political inaction and a repeated refusal to implement meaningful, independent civilian oversight. We are not here because of one person’s actions alone. We are here because our county leaders failed to act when they had the chance.
For three years, Fixin’ San Mateo County has urged the Board of Supervisors to establish a Civilian Oversight Commission and appoint an independent Inspector General. We did not make this request lightly or for political gain. We made it because oversight is how you prevent crises before they erupt — not how you clean up the damage after the fact.
In 2020, the California Legislature gave counties the authority to oversee their sheriffs through AB 1185. This law empowered local governments to create robust, independent bodies to review, investigate and provide accountability for their sheriff’s departments. Other counties saw this for what it was: a tool to build trust, improve transparency and support the good officers doing hard work every day.
San Mateo County did not.
Instead of heeding the call for action, our Board of Supervisors hesitated. They formed the Independent Civilian Advisory Committee, a step in the right direction, but, ultimately, a body with no authority, no budget and no power to conduct investigations or issue findings. It was a placeholder.
The board’s decision to wait until a scandal forced their hand has brought us to this point. Today, we face a very real crisis of confidence. Public trust is eroding. Reports allege that Sheriff Corpus interfered in internal investigations involving deputy misconduct. The department is in turmoil. And deputies, who deserve clear leadership and the public’s respect, are caught in the middle.
Let’s be clear, this is not a moment for political retribution. It’s a moment for responsible, corrective action. Civilian oversight is not a radical idea. It’s common sense. Counties like Los Angeles and Sonoma have implemented strong oversight models that work — models that feature independent inspectors general with subpoena power, professional staff and clear jurisdiction to investigate complaints and systemic issues. These structures don’t hinder law enforcement. They enhance it. They improve morale by ensuring fair, consistent standards. They build bridges between the department and the communities it serves. They create systems that reward integrity and expose misconduct. In the long run, oversight helps both deputies and the public.
Everyone benefits when law enforcement is trusted, transparent and accountable.
We are calling on the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors to do what should have been done long ago:
• Strengthen the ICAC immediately by granting it full investigatory powers, a defined mandate and the resources to do its job effectively.
• Appoint a permanent, independent Inspector General with subpoena authority — someone who reports not to the sheriff, but to the people through an independent structure.
• Lay out a transparent timeline for these reforms, with regular public updates and opportunities for community input at every stage.
We recognize that this moment is painful. For the community. For the Sheriff’s Office. For everyone who believed that our institutions were already functioning as they should. But pain is not an excuse for paralysis. It is a reason to move.
If we want to restore trust, we have to earn it. If we want to protect the public and support good deputies, we need real oversight — not just advisory groups and empty promises. The tools are there. The law is on our side. The time is now.
This is not about punishing one person. It’s about protecting the integrity of our institutions. It’s about making sure this never happens again.
Let’s fix what’s broken. Let’s make San Mateo County a model of transparency and accountability. Let’s not waste this chance.
Jim Lawrence is the board chair of Fixin’ San Mateo County.
(8) comments
I believe Rahm Emanuel said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.” Here we have Mr. Lawrence attempting to take advantage of the Corpus debacle in a thirst for power. Never mind that taxpayers are already footing the bill for a civilian oversight commission which to my knowledge hasn’t produced anything of value (or anything newsworthy). Except, of course, costing taxpayers… And there’s no guarantee that any civilian oversight commission with “teeth” would make any difference in the proceedings. Instead of wasting more taxpayer money, let’s let this serious crisis to go waste and deprive a thirst for power.
Regarding the cost to taxpayers: lawsuits pending against the county related to the crisis in the Sheriff's Office currently total $30M or more. Cutting off bad behavior at a much earlier point in time could prevent the escalation of problems into multi-million-dollar lawsuits.
Nancy - this would only work if the Oversight body has subpoena power and can refer to the DA. However, even the DA appears either dragging his feet or can't figure out what to do. We seem to have a law for everything but a recalcitrant sheriff can't be shoved out the door. A revision in our County Charter should spell out that the results of a Measure, like "A" is binding and requires/demands immediate removal from office. Whoever concocted Measure A was likely a sheriff beneficiary. We are being taken to the cleaners because of duplicitous behavior at the highest levels.
And, NancyG what makes you think a civilian oversight commission with “teeth” would make any difference? As Mr. van Ulden has noted, the powers-that-be with their full force of law hasn’t done much to prevent the increasing number of lawfare issues. If anything, if there were a civilian oversight board weighing in, Corpus would just add a few more names to her list of folks to sue. And why not?
Speaking of multi-million-dollar lawsuits, don’t be surprised if the sergeant placed on administrative leave without reason on Thursday files a multi-million-dollar lawsuit against Corpus and San Mateo County in the near future. At this point, I’d encourage anyone, directly or indirectly, affected by Corpus file lawsuits against Corpus and San Mateo County. I hear San Mateo County is flush with cash after receiving a portion of their VLF funds in California’s new budget. If I recall correctly, punitive damages are taxable so when setting the amount in the lawsuit claim, add a little extra to pay the feds and California.
The argument for adopting a governance structure like Sonoma or Los Angeles Counties to address the San Mateo County Sheriff crisis is overkill and misaligned with local realities. San Mateo County’s population is 97% under city governments, with only 3% in unincorporated areas, compared to Sonoma’s 26% and Los Angeles’ 7% under county governance. These counties’ oversight models suit their larger, more rural unincorporated populations, where county sheriffs have broader jurisdiction. San Mateo’s compact, urbanized structure means city police handle most law enforcement, reducing the need for such extensive county-level oversight.
The call for a Civilian Oversight Commission and Inspector General assumes the voting booth isn’t enough, but San Mateo’s engaged electorate already provides effective civilian oversight. The Board of Supervisors’ Independent Civilian Advisory Committee, while limited, reflects a tailored approach. Strengthening it sensibly is prudent, but copying Sonoma or Los Angeles’ heavy-handed models is unnecessary and risks bureaucratic overreach in a county where local accountability already works.
Oversight isn’t just about investigating what went wrong — it’s a deterrent. When people in power know they are being watched, they’re far less likely to abuse that power. Deterrence is one of the most effective tools we have to protect public trust and institutional integrity.
There is no panacea for corruption or malfeasance, but it's consistently clear that secrecy, lack of accountability creates fertile ground for bad actors. We need only to look to the Trump administration to see what a lack of consequences and accountability breeds. Oversight protects the public not just by responding to misconduct, but by deterring it.
Correction, NancyG. We need only to look at the treasonous Biden administration to see what a lack of consequences and accountability breeds. And what happens when oversight is complicit in a lack of consequences and accountability. Again, look to those with oversight over the treasonous Biden administration. Was there any? Dems and complicit mainstream media had no issues turning their backs on public trust and institutional integrity when they opened our borders. Have a Trump-tastic day!
Very nice Nancy - this must have been keeping you awake. "We need only to look to the Trump administration to see what a lack of consequences and accountability breeds". Last I heard, lawfare is still in full swing despite Supreme Court decisions, there is still a Congress, and Trump has repeatedly said that he will comply with all Constitutional provisions. And you compare his administration with the sleazy activities perpetrated by the sheriff and her sycophants? TDS has trickled down, hasn't it?
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.