(BCN) — The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors received a 42-page written opinion on Monday from the judge who oversaw an administrative hearing to determine whether embattled Sheriff Christina Corpus could keep her job, and the judge found multiple grounds on which to remove her.
Retired Judge James Emerson concluded that there are multiple grounds that give the Board the authority to remove Corpus, including neglecting her duties as sheriff by engaging in retaliation against multiple sheriff’s office employees and misusing public funds by having a conflict of interest in the hiring of her former chief of staff.
The letter comes 38 days after a two-week hearing which featured dozens of witness testimonies and gave Corpus the opportunity to defend herself. The administrative hearing was one of the final stages in the San Mateo County Board’s effort to remove Corpus.
In his statement, Emerson determined that Corpus and her former chief of staff, Victor Aenlle, had a close relationship that influenced her decision to hire him and the multiple pay-raise requests she made for him.
“Although vehemently denied by appellant and Victor Aenlle, the evidentiary record is highly suggestive that appellant Sheriff Corpus and Mr. Aenlle were in a romantic extra-marital relationship,” Emerson wrote. “Corpus elevated her own interest in the close personal relationship she held with Mr. Aenlle above her obligation to appoint, recruit, select, and/or retain based upon merit and in conformity with the principles of equal opportunity.”
Emerson also concluded that Corpus directed the arrest of sheriff’s union president Carlos Tapia, an outspoken critic of Corpus, without probable cause.
“Sheriff Corpus’s purportedly non-retaliatory justification for ordering an investigation against Deputy Tapia is, at the very least, questionable and, more likely, pretextual,” Emerson wrote. “Corpus ordered the investigation and ultimate arrest of Deputy Tapia because of Deputy Tapia’s position as DSA President and/or because of Deputy Tapia’s participation in activities as DSA President.”
Additionally, Emerson found that Corpus retaliated against former Capt. Brian Philip after he refused to deliver an internal affairs notice to an employee, believing it to be unlawful. Philip, who was overseeing the Professional Standards Bureau in the sheriff’s office, was transferred to corrections shortly after.
In Emerson’s eyes, Corpus lost all credibility as a witness after denying accusations that she and Aenlle had a close relationship, according to the written opinion.
“Based upon the evidence and argument presented, it is the undersigned Hearing Officer’s opinion that the County had cause, under Section 412.5 (of the County Charter), to remove appellant Sheriff Corpus,” Emerson wrote in his advisory opinion.
However, Corpus believes the Board’s process of conducting the removal is “unconstitutional, corrupt, and fundamentally unfair,” she said in a statement following the release of Emerson’s letter.
The Board’s effort to remove Corpus began after the November 2024 release of a county-commissioned investigation conducted by retired judge LaDoris Cordell. The 400-page report accused Corpus of a romantic involvement with her chief of staff, Victor Aenlle, and asserted that the pair fostered a culture of intimidation and retaliation in the Sheriff’s Office.
Corpus remained defiant against calls for her resignation, emphasizing that she was the victim of a “good ol’ boys club” that was resistant to the changes she was trying to bring to the sheriff’s office.
Her refusal to step down led the Board of Supervisors to take the unprecedented step of putting a charter amendment, Measure A, on the ballot that would grant the Board the authority to remove her. In March’s special election, voters overwhelmingly approved it.
Despite the passage of Measure A, Corpus reiterated that the Board’s process of trying to remove her goes against the voters of San Mateo County.
“The Board is rushing to fire me without regard for fairness, precedent, or the will of the voters,” she said in a statement Monday. “I stand by my actions, and the difficult decisions I make as the elected sheriff. I should have been cleared of all the allegations.”
Corpus also sent a letter last Thursday to California Attorney General Rob Bonta, requesting an opinion on the legality of the Measure A removal process.
The Board of Supervisors has 30 days to hold a public meeting to decide whether to put the final stamp of approval on ousting Corpus.
Copyright © 2025 Bay City News, Inc.
Want more insights? Join Working Title - our career elevating newsletter and get the future of work delivered weekly.
