This article appeared in the June 25 print edition of the Daily Post. Want to read the news first when it’s fresh? Pick up a copy at over 1,000 locations on the Mid-Peninsula.
BY ADRIANA HERNANDEZ
Daily Post Staff Writer
On the same day the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors voted to fire Sheriff Christina Corpus, they asked her why she wanted buy a $600,000 TV, 10 massage chairs that cost $6,670 a piece and a $74,000 conference room table.
Supervisor Jackie Speier asked Corpus if she viewed the request for the massage chairs as excessive.
Corpus claimed she didn’t know about the request. She said it was made by a sheriff’s “wellness committee” and was pushed forward by an HR employee.
“It was something that was requested by the employees. I did not see that request because I would not have approved it,” Corpus said.
The county’s procurement office declined the purchase request, and Corpus’ office ended up buying two of the cushy massage chairs.
Corpus could be without a job in 60 days, but she still put on a brave face at Tuesdays hearing. She said the Sheriff’s Office is working on a new system for purchase requests. She said she or Undersheriff Dan Perea will review each request from now on.
Speier also questioned a purchase request for a $600,000 TV for the headquarters conference room. “Why would you need a $600,000 TV?” Speier said.
Corpus said that she did not move forward with the purchase after Speier asked questions about it. She said the Sheriff’s Office is is trying to save money, so she decided the TV wasn’t necessary.
Supervisor David Canepa brought up the $74,000 conference room table she purchased in January. He wasn’t sure if it was true that she had bought the conference table.
Corpus said the table was necessary because of the size of her “team” and the size of the conference room in the Sheriff’s Office headquarters at 330 Bradford St. She said that with an organization of 800 people and during staff meetings, it is important to have space for everyone.
“We have a lot of people in that room and to have a small table, it really doesn’t really work for an organization our size,” Corpus said. “We looked at the size, and unfortunately, the costs are high. But that table will be there for 50 years.”
The 22-foot by 10-foot table includes 12 “cooling fans” in the legs and 10 “lockable access doors,” according to documents the Post obtained through a California Public Records Act request.
In March, the Post reported that she also purchased two soft-serve ice cream machines for employees in the county jails.
“was pushed forward by a Human Resources employee”
Hmmmm…. Was the “HR employee” a reference to Victor as chief of staff?
In the end, only 2 chairs were purchased, which was just enough chairs for Aenlle and Corpus to sit side by side and hold hands while getting a chair massage.
The BOS should have inquired about the Broadway lease, and the taxpayer dollars being spent for years on an unoccupied building.
$40,0000 a month in rent and counting….. oh wait she did do some interviews with Dan Noyes there though.
Inside sources indicate that the Sheriff’s Office Wellness Committee, not a County Wellness Group as untruthfully explained by Corpus, brought their “want” list to Corpus, Perea and Aenlle for review and approval. It was Corpus herself who prioritized obtaining a massage chair for every Bureau in the SO and pushed the purchase forward.
That is exactly why Perea, in his prior public appearance in front of the Board in response to questioning by Supervisor Speier, was vague and evasive in his responses and deferred to Corpus who had personally handled the massage chair prioritization and purchase. While Perea was vague and evasive, apparently in some misguided loyalty to protect Corpus’ poor decision-making, Corpus simply outright lied to the Board.
All SO purchases have historically been reviewed by the SO Finance Manager or Director, or both of them, in addition to Captain and Lieutenant approval for purchases on the Division and Bureau levels. Purchases over $100,000.00 previously required Board approval. Corpus response to Supervisor Speier was yet another feeble attempt to evade responsibility for poor management of public funds and purchases, indicating a grave need for a thorough and detailed audit of all Sheriff’s Office fiscal affairs since Corpus has been in office. That audit should be prioritized as soon as Corpus is removed from office and is unable to interfere with it. A Public Records Act request for all purchase, payment and supporting documentation for those Massage Chairs should reveal the truth.
More interesting than the questions asked of Corpus, were her consistently untruthful responses. For a first example, Supervisor Speier asked directly if any SO reserves currently belong to the SMC Mounted Patrol. To which Corpus deceptively and untruthfully replied, “We don’t have, currently, any reserve deputies that are part of the Mounted Patrol.”
Of course Corpus knew that to be untrue because her close colleague and self-admitted confidant, Reserve Deputy Victor Aenlle, is a longstanding Mounted Patrol member. The PA Post, or Supervisor Speier, could easily verify that through the Mounted Patrol offices in Woodside. Alternatively, anyone could merely check the Cordell Report where Corpus herself wrote in an email on 7/31/2023 to Rocio Kiryczun (p. 273), “Mr. Aenlle has also served as the Captain/CEO for the Mounted Patrol of San Mateo County.” Or, where the same report (p. 268) provides a copy of Aenlle’s Extra Help Application Detail indicating, “Leadership Experience, Captain 1/2010 – Present, Mounted Patrol of San Mateo County Woodside, California”. Or, where the same report (p. 265-266) provides a copy of Aenlle’s Resume “Mounted Patrol 2010-Present”. Sustained allegation 13 of the Cordell report (pp. 88-90) details the inappropriate and unlawful presentation of a special or honorary badge to Angelo Costanzo of the Mounted Patrol by Aenlle.
What’s more, Corpus appeared to do a very poor job of reading her presentation notes, giving the appearance she knew little, and could only read. Her presentation itself sported images of former Sheriff Bolanos, former Undersheriff Mark Robbins, and former Captain Paul Kunkle on slide 10, as she spoke of her “new programs” including high school for incarcerated persons. Such a program is not new, high school diplomas have been achievable for decades in SMC, courtesy of Corpus’ predecessors’ programs. When it came to answers about fiscal maters, like a $600,000.00 TV, Corpus was equally misleading and untruthful. In this case overall, Corpus herself betrayed the untruthfulness of her words in her lack of familiarity with her own presentation.
What Corpus did do is open the doors for a full audit of the SO’s fiscal records by the Supervisors, who were clearly doing a preliminary check on Corpus’ veracity. The Government Code already permits the Supervisors to conduct such an inquiry and audit, which clearly should be accomplished as a matter of prudent public policy when a corrupt elected official is removed from their position.
DEI hire at its finest
What meeting have happened at that table ? Has anyone sat in those chairs to hold meetings for those 800 employees? Does she care about the 800 people or community member or does she enjoy flexing her own powers to the world?
A clear public demonstration that elected officials can not just be removed for wrongdoing especially when someone elected is defiant. The games are done now, the consequences will catch up 10 fold eventually and then the deals will be broken. Throw the book at this law enforcement spectacle.
This “P@S” woman needs to resign. The only words the entire San Mateo community wants to hear- we have spoken now listen- we the community wants this lady to resign! Enough childish games, stop wasting money and time. Hopefully the county comes after her pension to payback the lawsuits and the $1000 an hour lawyers.
Why after questioning the Sheriff about the purchases did not ONE board member ask her why her BF Victor Aenlle’s name still appears as Chief Of Staff on the tax payer funded Sheriff’s Office website? The request to remove has been ignored for months. It is a rare occurrence that Corpus appears and would have been a good opportunity. The taxpayers of San Mateo County deserve to have an accurate up to date Sheriff website.
Virginia Bernal: Yesterday’s 9am session was the County’s annual _budget_ meeting. What you’re currently obsessing about is obviously not a proposed 2025-2026 Sheriff Dept. expenditure, hence not relevant to the agenda.
Even if we grant, for sake of discussion, the persistence of an inappopriate name on the Sheriff Dept. Web site being a bigger problem than everything else, it would still be wildly off-topic for that meeting, as far as I can see.
“LibsRpedos” (rolls eyes): I wasn’t among the 56.86% of county voters who preferred Ms. Corpus on June 7, 2022, but your repeatedly calling that democratic election a “DEI hire” process is several sigma beyond absurd, well into clinical concern. Please have that looked at.
DEI hire at its finest
Fraud and WASTE appears to be the norm in this department!!
Time for a MAJOR OVERHAUL and cleaning out of staff!!
This is appalling.
Blaming other people, lying flat out lying!!! Sorry dumb dumb the buck STOPS with you!!!!! All her lies are catching up! Nobody is buying the absolute nonsense she is spewing!!!! She looks like a hag from the stress!!! All brought on by her choices. Get out!!!!!!
This is a horrible misuse of citizen’s tax money.
A full audit of the SO’s fiscal records has been needed for years. It’s ridiculous what some individuals are allow to purchase with County taxes. All the enablers needs to go with Corpus.
I don’t think I or anyone asking why Mr. Anelle’s name is still on the Sheriff Office website is obsessing about it, as I said, it is rare that we get this woman on a public forum and why not ask her ? Jackie Speier asked her if there were any members of the mounted patrol that were currently reserve deputies was that not off-topic? Which by the way, she lied about . These are unusual times and if the only way we can get an answer this way so be it. Not every comment is going to be a long drawn out legal hypothesis. Some of us citizens simply want to see some correct and changes while we are all suffering through this debacle.
HeyVirginia B, I personally like the good doc’s pic left up on the Sheriff website. As pathetic as it is to see his stupid mug linger up there , it is a reminder of what a real dirtbag looks like. Learn to enjoy it!
I believe the wording by Jackie Spears about the mounted patrol had to do with expenses because in the past there have been “creative write offs” for their own animals… not sure if there is more to that story since our little friend-ster has been a part of the mounted patrol
There is more to the story. The Mounted Patrol, the County and the Sheriff’s Office (SO) were both sued in about 1989. Speier originally served on the Board from 1980 to 1986, and has mentioned several times now, her recall of multiple issues from that era. The settlement of the ‘89 case was achieved through a court order, that placed certain restrictions and requirements on both the SO and the Mounted Patrol.
It appears that Aenlle and Corpus violated that ‘89 court order in presenting the honorary, special deputy badge as detailed in Allegation 14 of the Cordell Report. California Penal Code §166 is a misdemeanor criminal violation that outlines the rules and punishments for contempt of court. Contempt of court is described as disruptive behavior during court proceedings, refusing to testify, or disobeying court orders. It very much appears that Corpus and Aenlle’s intentional behaviors violated that 1989 court order, committing misdemeanor crimes through their behavior.
I watched the BOS Budget meeting and was appalled that the Sheriff blatantly lied on several answers to Supervisor Speier. Former Resident nailed it! I, too, researched her answers and was very amused after visiting the Sheriff Activities League website to see how they planned to expand the program on the coast to Farmworker families and include Millbrae; there are only two to three people working in that program. She doesn’t have the capacity to expand. The general rule is that children aged 5 to 13 have a 1:14 adult-child ratio and a 1:28 teacher-child ratio. The Sheriff knew she didn’t have the proper staffing to add additional programs, so why lie about it? We all know what happened to the little boy who cried wolf. When he finally tried to tell the truth, no one believed him, and the wolf ate him. As a taxpayer, that Sheriff’s office needs to be audited from the beginning of her tenure as Sheriff to the present. I would like to know what other items besides ice cream machines, massage chairs, expensive tables, and an almost theater screen were purchased. She can’t blame Sheriff Bolanos. He was on the design planning of the new building, not the interior decorating. That one is all on her.
There was already a table in the new Sheriff Building when Corpus moved. Ask her what they did with the old table or tables pushed together and how much that table was? And why they needed a new grand table they can hide in when they are in the Sheriff’s office and have plenty of trained Sheriff personnel with guns and various weapons…
and Former Resident? violating 1989 court order by wearing a badge? Spier said something to the sound of creative expenses for personal pets ie… did someone expense off or pay for their own animals food or equipment and claim it was mounted patrol related ? or did I understand those words differently?
Respectfully to commenter Different Take, I either expressed myself poorly or you misunderstood my comment; perhaps both to an extent. The court case is known as Sokolow v. County of San Mateo (1989). You are free to read the court’s decision as it is available on the web.
In pertinent part, the court’s order in that case required, “…the sheriff’s department to (1) cease conferring on members of the Patrol the positions of ‘Deputy Sheriff,’ ‘Special Deputy Sheriff,’ or ‘any other position which would cause a reasonable [213 Cal. App. 3d 242] person to believe or suspect that the … Patrol or its members are agents or representatives of the Sheriff’s Department’; (2) cease the issuance of identification cards to Patrol members identifying them as ‘Deputy Sheriffs,’ ‘Special Deputy Sheriffs,’ or anything else giving the impression that they are agents of the sheriff’s department…”.
You are absolutely correct relative to Supervisor Speier’s words in the meeting. Her intentions behind that specific line of questioning about the Mounted Patrol are hers alone. Once the criminal Grand Jury returns their indictment(s) in July or so, we will see what, if anything, is charged criminally relative to this. It was a pretty big deal in ‘89, perhaps not so much now.
Supervisor Speier also questioned Corpus about the duration of ongoing internal affairs investigations, and employees on administrative leave for extended periods of time, yet the reason for the question may not have been clear to many who watched. The Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (POBAR or POBR) is codified in Government Code (GC) Sections 3300-3312. §3304 GC in pertinent part reads, “(d) Except as provided in this subdivision and subdivision (g), no punitive action, nor denial of promotion on grounds other than merit, shall be undertaken for any act, omission, or other allegation of misconduct if the investigation of the allegation is not completed within one year of the public agency’s discovery by a person authorized to initiate an investigation of the allegation of an act, omission, or other misconduct.” There are exceptions to the one year period of time, however the reason given by Corpus is not one of the exceptions to the one year requirement to impose discipline.
Why is this important? Supervisor Speier specifically asked about employees who should be terminated, or fired, based on their inappropriate behaviors. Failure to impose that discipline by Corpus means she cannot fire those employees after the one year period of time. This potentially creates a monumental liability for the SO and the County. It is essentially keeping a bad employee, one who should be fired, on and increasing County liability for having the employee continue their employment.
It is mismanagement in the application of discipline to employees who should be fired. It is, in short, apparently what Corpus does for reasons known only to her. It is neglecting her duties as the Sheriff. It is also a violation of her oath of office.