San Mateo County voters decided on Tuesday to amend the county charter to give the Board of Supervisors the authority to fire Sheriff Christina Corpus over allegations of corruption. The saga of Sheriff Corpus dates back to 2021. Here’s a timeline.
In the news
This page contains news article for those interested in all facets of law enforcement oversight and reform. These articles span all states and cover police departments as well as Sheriff's departments. We're providing this information for those who wish to better understand why oversight is needed, the challenges it faces, and where and how it has improved the communities that have adopted it. News articles from external sources will open in a new tab.
Fixin’ San Mateo County Calls for Immediate Action Following Apparent Passage of Measure A
Today, the voters of San Mateo County took a historic step toward accountability and transparency in law enforcement. With the apparent passage of Measure A, the Board of Supervisors now has the authority to remove the county sheriff—ensuring that no one is above the law. This victory marks a turning point for our community, and we commend the residents of San Mateo County for demanding meaningful reform.
“This has been a long and difficult road, but the people have spoken. Now, our elected leaders must act without delay,” said Jim Lawrence, Board Chair of Fixin’ San Mateo County. “It is time for the Board of Supervisors to establish permanent, independent civilian oversight of the Sheriff’s Office—our community cannot afford further inaction.”
Fixin’ San Mateo County has led a broad coalition in pursuit of reform. Six local governments representing 60% of the county’s population endorsed our efforts, alongside more than 35 organizations advocating for stronger oversight. The county has paid out over $13 million in settlements related to misconduct in the past four years, with millions more in pending lawsuits and the costs of special elections. The status quo is unsustainable.
With Measure A’s passage, the Board of Supervisors has a mandate from the voters. They must immediately use their authority under AB 1185 to support and strengthen the Independent Civilian Advisory Commission on the Sheriff’s Office (ICAC) and establish an independent Inspector General’s office which should work closely with ICAC. These mechanisms are essential for restoring public trust, ensuring transparency, and preventing future crises.
At the same time, Fixin’ San Mateo County remains steadfast in our support for the hardworking deputies who risk their lives to protect our community. True public safety requires both accountability and trust between law enforcement and the people they serve.
The time for discussion is over. The voters have made their will clear. We call on the Board of Supervisors to act now—our community’s future depends on it.
Early results show ballot measure to oust sheriff appears headed to landslide victory
Returns from early mail-in and dropbox ballots, as well as all in-person Vote Center votes, show Yes leading the Measure A special election by a margin of more than 70 points.
San Mateo latest to call for sheriff’s resignation
San Mateo joins several Peninsula cities in calling on San Mateo County Sheriff Christina Corpus to resign amid a scandal-filled term that’s resulted in a scathing investigative report, the resignation of more than 100 sworn staff, numerous claims of retaliation and the controversial arrest of a union leader.
Lawsuit filed against San Mateo County, sheriff
Former Capt. Brian Philip, who resigned from the Sheriff’s Office in November, filed a lawsuit against San Mateo County alleging whistleblower retaliation, wrongful termination, gender discrimination and workplace violations under Sheriff Christina Corpus’ administration.
Sheriff files complaint against San Mateo County
A formal complaint was filed by Sheriff Christina Corpus’ attorneys against the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors and Chief Elections Officer Mark Church for allegedly violating the state’s election code with the slated charter amendment vote in March, another effort to discredit the election by the embattled sheriff.
Statement from the County of San Mateo Regarding Sheriff’s $10 Million Government Claim & Release of Full Report Transcript
The following is a statement from the County of San Mateo in response to a $10 million government claim filed by Sheriff Christina Corpus. The statement also addresses an allegation in the claim regarding allegedly missing transcript pages in an exhibit to the independent report and the cost of the investigation.
Sheriff Corpus alleges discrimination, seeks $10M from county
Sheriff Christina Corpus has filed a $10 million claim against San Mateo County, alleging “racism, harassment, discrimination and retaliation” during the county’s investigation into her administration.
Fixin’ San Mateo County Statement on Ballot Measure A
Redwood City, CA – San Mateo County has faced significant challenges in its Sheriff’s Office, from mass resignations to widespread declarations of no confidence in Sheriff Christina Corpus. Employees in the Sheriff’s Office are experiencing difficult working conditions impacting their morale, the ability to do their jobs, and putting stress on their own families. These events highlight the urgent need for robust, lasting oversight to restore public trust, ensure transparency and accountability, support fiscal integrity, and protect our community. A healthy work environment is necessary to promote healthy interactions with the community.
Fixin’ San Mateo County has consistently advocated for systemic change through independent, effective oversight. While the Board of Supervisors’ ballot measure aims to address the immediate crisis, it is crucial to recognize that systemic problems require systemic solutions.
Independent oversight is not a one-time fix. The recent Cordell investigation demonstrates the value of having an independent Inspector General (IG) conduct thorough investigations and issue recommendations. However, this process cannot be ad hoc—it must be ongoing and institutionalized to ensure accountability for all sheriffs, now and in the future.
Our recommendations remain clear:
- A permanent Inspector General is essential to achieving systemic change.
- A stronger role for the Independent Citizens’ Advisory Committee (ICAC) is needed to provide more meaningful civilian engagement.
- A confidential channel—independent of the Sheriff’s Office—for receiving complaints, including whistleblower concerns, must be established.
Civilian involvement isn’t just about responding to crises—it’s about preventing them. The alleged behaviors uncovered in the recent investigation are unacceptable and are eroding public trust and safety, and resulting in potential lawsuits costly to the taxpayers. These issues demand urgent action, not just to address current challenges but to build lasting guardrails for future accountability.
We recognize the Board of Supervisors’ effort to address some oversight gaps with this ballot measure, but we also urge them to implement Assembly Bill 1185, which would provide even stronger civilian oversight tools.
Jim Lawrence, Chair of Fixin’ San Mateo County, stated, “The recent investigation underscores the importance of independent oversight—not as a temporary measure, but as a permanent safeguard. Oversight benefits everyone—those inside the Sheriff’s Office and the communities they serve. San Mateo County deserves a system that ensures accountability, public safety, and trust for generations to come.”
Fixin’ San Mateo County remains focused on achieving systemic change that protects vulnerable communities, ensures public safety, and strengthens public trust. This is about more than one individual or one moment—it’s about building a culture of accountability for the future.
DA throws out charges against deputy’s union president
San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe announced this morning he is throwing out the timecard fraud case against deputy’s union president Carlos Tapia, who was arrested on the orders of Sheriff Christina Corpus. Wagstaffe said: “We have concluded based on the follow-up investigation that no crime was committed by Deputy Carlos Tapia, that the complete investigation showed that there was no basis to believe any violation of law had occurred, and finally that Deputy Tapia should not have been arrested.”