The San Mateo County Supervisors accepted the results of the special elections last month on Tuesday, giving them the authority to initiate a process that could lead to the elimination of the Sheriff Confactor Christina Corpus with a vote of four fifths.
The measure follows months of controversy around Corpus, which faces multiple accusations, including corruption, misconduct and an inappropriate relationship with its former chief of cabinet, Victor Aenlle, cleaning the vanía.
The Unanimous Acceptance of the Election Results by the Four Supervisors Present – Supervisor Jackie Speier was absentee – formalizes The Outcome of the March 4 ELECTION, WHERE 84% OF VOTERS APPROVED MEASURE A. Measure Amended The County Byiff Allow The Sheriffy for The And The Serdaly for The And The Serdaly For the and the Serdaly for the and the sereiff’s and the sheriffy for the and the sheriffy for the and the sheriffy for him and the sheriffy, the Sheeriffy the sheriffy, the sheriffy for him and the sheriffy, the sereiffy and the sheriffy, the sheriffy, the sheriffy, the sheriffy, the sheriffy, the sheriffy The Sheriffy, the Sheriffy, the Sheriffy, the Sheriffy, the Sheriffy, the Sheriffy, Sheriffy, Sheriffy, Sheriffy. or the term of the corpus.
The Charter amendment will be official on April 18, which will allow the Board to begin to adopt elimination procedures as soon as its April 22 meeting, he thought that the final adoption can take longer.
The San Mateo County Supervisors Board, President David Canepa emphasized the Board’s commitment to a fair process.
“The next action that the Board will take is to notify the Sheriff’s intention to eliminate, which will require the first vote of the four fifths of the Board,” Canepa said. “This will be a measured and transparent process that will be fair with the sheriff.”
This initial vote is part of a proposed 12 steps removal process that was presented by lawyer Alfonso Estrada, with the law firm Hanson Bridgett. The company was hired by the County to help prepare the procedures to initiate the procedures.
This would be followed by a warning of intention to Corpus and a conference prior to the remade to respond to the accusations.
Corpus would have the option of requesting a public or private public probative hearing supervised by a jointly selected audience officer, who would not be a member of the Board, but it is possible that the county is used by the county.
After the recommendation of the Court Officer and a registration review, a final vote of four fifths by the Board for Elimination would be required. The whole process could take at least several months.
In public comments, the deacon Lauren McCombs of the Episcopal Church of Christ urged the Board to act quickly, citing the passage of the measure of the widhelling measure a reflection of the public feeling for the new leadership.
“I encourage the Board to act quickly to vote to eliminate the Sheriff Corpus. Measure A has empowered the five of you with the ability to do so,” said McCombs, a member of the Fixin Community Defense Group ‘San Mateo. “This is a time to move slowly. It is obvious that both the public and the deputies of our Sheriff no longer have faith in the corpus of the sheriff” to lead the department of the Sheriff. “
Corpus did not respond to the requests for comments from this news organization. However, his legal team expressed important Conerns on the meeting of the duration of the process of proposition of the process.
The lawyer Thomas Mazzucco argued that the name of the “Sheriff’s elimination process” suggests a predetermined result and requested the impartiality of the Board, citing public statements made based on an independent investigation of the retired judge Ladoris Cordell.
“That inhele that there is already a preconceived determination that the Sheriff will be eliminated,” Mazzucco said during public comments, referring to the statements of supervisors Ray Mueller and Noelia Corzo, who requested the elimination of Corpus before the special elections.
Mazzucco dismissed the report of approximately 400 pages and used the period of public comments to try to discredit Cordell’s findings.
“It does not have a probative value. They do not swore interviews. They are not interviews recorded on tape. There is no methodology of who was interviewed. We do not know who interviewed. We are in the dark,” said Mazzucco.
However, the members of two Sheriff’s Sheriff of the San Mateo County, whose complaints initiated the investigation into the Corpus, have previously defended Cordell’s findings.
The detective Elliot Storch, of the Deputy Sheriffs Association, previously told this news organization: “None of this has nothing to do with bias, careers or gender; it is about the bad decisions of the Sheriff Corpus” as leader. “
Another Corpus lawyer, Christopher Ulrich, said Conerns about due justice within the proposed procedures.
“So, what we have here is a meeting that starts the action, its accusations. They confirm it or an officer of hearings intervenes and the Board then reaffirms its own initial accusations,” said Ulrich. “Then, the appeal dates back to the same Board so that this Board presents the opinion. And that is what the limits were placed in Mr. Estrada by the structure of the county government.”
The County Prosecutor John Nibbelin indicated the will to consider the comments of the Corpus legal team about the process, stating that they would meet with Mazzucco.
Corpus previously pointed out his intention to fight the elimination efforts, saying after the passage of measure A, “my legal team and I expect this opportunity, and trust that I will claim through a legitimate process.”
Originally published:
