Some years ago, I was working on a project about one of the state’s most dynamic, talented and smart officials. One of his closest advisors told me the secret to this person’s success: “He doesn’t make the mistake of believing his own bull (bleep).” He said this without the bleep.
This thought kept coming back to me as I pored over the 166-page report by the Oppenheimer Investigations Group into allegations by Sheriff Christina Corpus that San Mateo County Executive Mike Callagy interfered with her management of the office in several acts of “abuse of power, sexual discrimination and bullying tactics.”
The report repeatedly dismisses Corpus’ long list of complaints — and the specific allegations behind them — as “not substantiated.”
Having been buffeted by wave after wave of attacks, Corpus went on offense. This is proving to be something less than shrewd. Just because she was charging is no guarantee she was going forward.
For example, her continuing attack on the 400-page report issued months ago by former Judge LaDoris Cordell has been that the people quoted in the report remained anonymous, that the report was biased and incomplete and that she has yet to have the chance to tell her side of the story.
Well, now. The OIG report quotes 13 people by name, including county officials, former top-ranking officials Corpus had appointed to key positions, and Aenlle. Not incidentally, OIG’s report only serves to buttress the Cordell report. Corpus, through her attorney, found reasons not to be interviewed.
What emerges from the latest report is that Callagy bent over backwards to help Corpus when she was first elected. He went so far as to fund the new sheriff’s transition team and help her find well-established credible law enforcement professionals for her command staff.
Worse for Corpus, however, are the comments by the people called upon to address Corpus’ complaints, starting with this from OIG’s summation: “Corpus did not provide the underlying factual allegations related to many of the allegations.” As the report goes on to state, there was substantial confirmation of Callagy’s denials of the allegations, but when it came time to assess Corpus’ version of events, OIG “did not have the opportunity to speak to Corpus. Without a live interview, there is no opportunity to hear the individual’s story directly, request clarifications, probe motives, or ask follow-up questions. This made it difficult to assess Corpus’ credibility.”
Recommended for you
But not impossible, based on the comments of those who did speak to OIG.
Katy Roberts, a county Employee and Labor Relations analyst, told OIG: “While she tried to support Corpus and maintain their professional working relationship, she learned that she could not always trust the information Corpus was giving her.” And this: “Rather, Roberts said, Corpus is the one responsible for the position she is currently in. Specifically, Corpus chose to support her Chief of Staff, Aenlle, by ignoring several complaints about him.”
At the meeting in which Corpus said she was “shocked” that Callagy would ask about her dating life, Rocio Kiryczun, county Human Resources director, who was in the same meeting, “said Callagy told Corpus during this meeting that he was supportive of her and wanted her and the Sheriff’s Office to be successful. He treated Corpus very respectfully during this meeting. At no time did he ask Corpus about her dating life.”
Adam Ely, deputy county executive, “believes Corpus’ allegations against Callagy are a distraction or a defense that she came up with when she came under fire for her leadership,” according to the OIG report. “(Ely) believes Corpus is looking to push blame on others, like Callagy.” Ely also said “Aenlle had influence and a presence that seemed outsized for his level of experience and expertise.”
And Chris Hsiung, Corpus’ initial undersheriff, former chief of the Mountain View Police Department and a figure with a national reputation for professionalism and credibility, told OIG he left the office because, “I can’t work for someone who lies all the time.”
So, not to put too fine a point on it, if Corpus’ strategy had been to call into question the credibility of, you know, everyone else, this might not have been the best way to do it.
The real problem for Corpus may not be that she fell in love with someone, but that she has fallen in love with her own story.
Mark Simon is a veteran journalist, whose career included 15 years as an executive at SamTrans and Caltrain. He co-hosts a podcast/videocast that can be found at TheGamePeninsula.com, and he can be reached at marksimon@smdailyjournal.com.
Thanks, Mark, for a fair and thorough explanation of this latest wrinkle in the Christina Corpus story. I remember just prior to the Amendment A vote Corpus supporters repeating in these pages Corpus' bogus defense while dismissing Judge Cordell's report. If they still believe the sheriff should not be removed from office after 84% of votes cast approved such removal, they have proven to be just as intransigent as the sheriff and the good doctor. I wonder if he's taking any new patients?
Thanks for a recap, Mr. Simon, providing the latest developments in the “As the Sheriff’s World Turns” soap opera. I notice you don’t mention Corpus’s attorney by name. Is this because the previous attorney is just that, a “previous” attorney? No inside information on the status of Corpus’s ouster or the criminal investigation into her? While I enjoy your recaps, I get the feeling that this Corpus saga is being slow-walked until the next sheriff’s election.
The grand design has always been to line the pockets of eager ambulance chasers. She is not going anywhere and must have a good belly laugh every time she comes to her office.
Mark - the Corpus saga is evidence that the entire attorney community's primary objective is maximizing financial gains, "the grand design". That group does nothing but cost us, the taxpayers, money that should be used for other identified priorities. In my opinion the recall effort was rigged from the beginning as the ballot was constructed such that lawyers would be required to validate and eventually challenge the outcome. Perhaps I am cynical, but this case is dragging on with no end in sight. The County attorney's office should have foreseen this debacle but apparently had neither the competence nor practiced due diligence.
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.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(5) comments
Thanks, Mark, for a fair and thorough explanation of this latest wrinkle in the Christina Corpus story. I remember just prior to the Amendment A vote Corpus supporters repeating in these pages Corpus' bogus defense while dismissing Judge Cordell's report. If they still believe the sheriff should not be removed from office after 84% of votes cast approved such removal, they have proven to be just as intransigent as the sheriff and the good doctor. I wonder if he's taking any new patients?
Thanks for a recap, Mr. Simon, providing the latest developments in the “As the Sheriff’s World Turns” soap opera. I notice you don’t mention Corpus’s attorney by name. Is this because the previous attorney is just that, a “previous” attorney? No inside information on the status of Corpus’s ouster or the criminal investigation into her? While I enjoy your recaps, I get the feeling that this Corpus saga is being slow-walked until the next sheriff’s election.
The grand design has always been to line the pockets of eager ambulance chasers. She is not going anywhere and must have a good belly laugh every time she comes to her office.
What grand design? Hers? The county’s? This makes no sense.
Mark - the Corpus saga is evidence that the entire attorney community's primary objective is maximizing financial gains, "the grand design". That group does nothing but cost us, the taxpayers, money that should be used for other identified priorities. In my opinion the recall effort was rigged from the beginning as the ballot was constructed such that lawyers would be required to validate and eventually challenge the outcome. Perhaps I am cynical, but this case is dragging on with no end in sight. The County attorney's office should have foreseen this debacle but apparently had neither the competence nor practiced due diligence.
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.