The office and its power

Three sheriffs, three scandals. From illegal brothels with human trafficking stings to Batmobiles to personal misuse of public funds, the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office has been mired in controversy. 

The office of the sheriff of San Mateo County is an elected position. As one of the most powerful figures in local government, it has consistently been at the center of controversy for the past 20 years due to the individuals who have held the office. 

But why is that? Is it due to voter complacency? Does the sheriff’s office transform those who go in? Or perhaps more likely, is the office simply too powerful to avoid corruption? 

Despite the promise of accountability elections should bring, the county’s last three sheriffs have all faced major scandals that have shaken public trust.

Frank Anechiarico, an associate with the Rutgers Institute on Anti-Corruption Studies (RIACS) and a professor at Hamilton College, who teaches government, public policy, and jurisprudence, studies this issue. 

In Anechiarico’s view, the major issue of corruption is due to the large amount of power and independence entrusted to this office. 

“They have a lot of power. We trust them with the use of force. That’s a sacred trust in a democracy that can be abused and must be very carefully monitored,” Anechiarico said.

Anechiarico’s concern highlights the tension between public trust and the strong authority the sheriff holds. When a single office holds both political motives and control over law enforcement, it becomes uniquely susceptible to ethical lapses.

Anechiarico describes this failure of accountability and integrity among the sheriffs as goal displacement. When the opportunity arises for elected officials to prioritize selfish interests over public interest, corruption is given a chance to emerge. 

“This is when our career advancement, turf protection, and budget expansion all become more important than actually delivering the service that the agency was designed to deliver,” Anechiarico said.

In other words, corruption often begins not with overt greed but with misplaced priorities. Other researchers, such as Tong Chen, another associate with RIACS, discuss what inspires corruption. 

Corruption is an action weighed between one’s own benefits and the punishment. When the elected official deems that the risk of punishment is worth it for the benefit, this is when corruption begins.

“When a public official has the opportunity to engage in corruption, they need to make a decision about how much benefit they can make and the possibility of being detected and punished. Corruption is a decision based on benefit and cost,” Chen said. 

The Sheriffs

The controversy began in 2006 with the election of Greg Munks. A veteran of the Palo Alto Police Department and longtime Undersheriff, Munks entered office with decades of experience. But just a year later, he was caught in a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) sting operation known as Operation Dollhouse, according to the FBI.

During a trip to Las Vegas with then-Undersheriff Carlos Bolanos and several others from the department, Munks was found at an illegal brothel under federal investigation for human trafficking, including the trafficking of minors and drug distribution.

In a public statement, Munks called the incident a “personal embarrassment” and claimed that he believed the establishment was a “legitimate business.” Still, the scandal haunted his administration. He completed his term and retired in 2016, paving the way for Bolanos to run unopposed and succeed him.

For several years, Bolanos managed to avoid controversy. That changed in 2022 when a story involving a Batmobile made national headlines. An ABC7 report stated that Bolanos sent four deputies to Indiana to raid the only certified maker of the Batmobile.

It would soon be revealed that the raid was carried out as a personal favor to a wealthy campaign donor and friend, real estate developer Sam Anagnostou, who was in a dispute with the manufacturer. 

The trip, complete with taxpayer-funded flights, hotels, and meals, was well outside Bolanos’ jurisdiction. While the San Mateo County board of supervisors opened an investigation, the California Attorney General declined to pursue the case, and the district attorney ultimately dropped the charges against the Batmobile business owner. 

Soon after, an independent KGO-TV report revealed that Bolanos had also granted concealed carry permits, primarily to campaign donors, some of whom lacked proper documentation or training. High-profile recipients of the license included tech executives Larry Ellison and Thomas Siebel, who did not have the necessary training mandated by the state. 

The same KGO-TV report found that Bolanos had continued to show preferential treatment of donors in the office. A majority of his promotions were skewed towards those who had donated to his campaign. When compared with neighboring counties, the difference in donors versus non-donors promoted was stark.

With the election of Christina Corpus, the county’s first female and Latina sheriff, in 2022, according to the county website, many residents hoped that this change would also signal a shift in the department’s corruption and scandals. Yet, less than a year into her term, she too was engulfed in scandal. 

According to a report by CalMatters and other outlets, a married Corpus used county funds for a personal trip to Hawaii, where she traveled with Victor Aenelle, a real estate associate rumored to be her romantic partner. Soon after, she would divorce her husband and hire Aenelle for a high-paying position within the Sheriff’s Office.

Aenelle, who was appointed to the position of Chief of Staff and Executive Director of the office, had only been trained as a real estate agent. He had had no previous experience in law enforcement. Over the course of her term, he would become the Chief of Staff and eventually be assigned to the Concealed Carry Weapon Unit. 

Soon after, reports surfaced that Corpus had misused county money for luxury purchases, including expensive jewelry, such as $12,000 earrings and $1,200 boots, as well as expensive office furniture. 

The situation escalated when Corpus allegedly retaliated against critics. She ordered the arrest of Carlos Tapia, head of the sheriff’s union, on allegations of timecard fraud that the district attorney later dismissed. A journalist who had investigated her was also briefly detained.

A growing scandal prompted the board of supervisors to use Measure A, an amendment voted by the people that allows the board to remove a sheriff with a four-fifths vote. In a unanimous vote, Corpus was ousted by all five supervisors, including former Congresswoman Jackie Speier.

Looking forward 

So, what can be done? Fixin’ San Mateo County looks to fix this problem. Fixin’ is an organization built to ensure checks on the sheriff and prevent them from becoming too powerful.

Fixin’ strives to add independent oversight committees to monitor the behavior and activities of the sheriff, since the department’s corruption is a pattern perpetuated by a lack of checks and balances.

“We need an independent civilian commission with an Inspector General with subpoena power,” said Jim Lawrence, former Mayor of Foster City and current board member of Fixin’ San Mateo County. 

In 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom granted every County board of supervisors the authority to establish an ordinance that would enable a county to establish a civilian oversight board with an Inspector General’s office and subpoena power for the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office, provided they agreed to introduce it.

Anechiarico and his colleagues, who are highly educated in the field of corruption, have reached the same conclusion.

Anechiarico believes it is best to have open books so that the public may see where their money is going. Further, Anechiarico agrees with Lawrence’s preference for oversight committees.

“It’s very important to have regular audits that are, particularly in the case of governments, public, so that everyone has access to see where the money is going and whether it has been affected. Audits should also assess the effectiveness of the spending. Performance audits are a crucial component of modern public administration. There has to be an independent monitor inspector responsible for overseeing police and sheriff’s operations,” Anechiarico said.

Soon after Newsom’s new law, Fixin’ sought to get San Mateo County’s board of supervisors to implement an Inspector General’s office. Yet, the board failed to fully enact this plan. 

Instead, they created a group that would not watch the sheriff, but rather provide insight for the supervisors. Further, this department would not be separate from the sheriff’s office.

“They decided to put together an advisory commission on the sheriff’s office for the supervisors. It’s the advisory commission only, and it’s for the supervisors; it’s not for the sheriff. It’s no independence from the department at all,” Lawrence said. 

Some attribute this to the board’s lack of initiative to pass a bill for this. After all, if they pass the bill, both they and the sheriff lose power. According to The Appeal, a shift in power from a centuries-long tradition, where the sheriff held nearly all of the law enforcement power in the county, would no longer be the case. 

Since the board is not up for reelection until 2028, some are concerned that they may refrain from change until it benefits their reelection campaigns. Lawrence attributes their reluctance to change to the fact that they are politicians, despite signs of a changing attitude. 

As politicians, they may postpone action until closer to the election to appeal to voters and bolster their own appearances. 

“Their attitude is changing. The evidence is mounting that they will have to make some kind of change to please the public. You must remember that supervisors are politicians. They will be up for a vote in two years. Believe me, they’re going to start doing this to make sure they stay in office,” Lawrence said.

Oversight boards are not a supreme intrusive agency, according to Fixin’. Instead, they are an establishment that helps to regulate good behavior and keep positions like the sheriff from deviating and causing scandals. 

As it stands, there is no one to oversee the sheriff.

“When they have power unchecked and no one’s looking over their shoulder, they can do anything they want,” Lawrence said.

Although Lawrence has mostly observed corruption and scandal, as well as the need for oversight committees at the local level, these issues have also been observed on a broader scale. 

When sheriffs are found to have some shocking scandal or are guilty of corruption, they rarely face any substantial consequences. Often, they are entitled to benefits and maintain their pensions. 

“Sheriffs, especially, are often not punished when they have issues of corruption like this,” Chen said.

This is evidenced through when Corpus was voted out of office by the grand jury. She was offered a lump sum of $1 million and four years of healthcare to leave office, according to an independent report by ABC7. Instead, she stayed in office and maintained power. When she was officially ousted from her role as sheriff, she received a majority of her paycheck without having to do any of the work.

Chen, who focuses on studying corruption on a broader scale, has developed a system to categorize corruption. By using Artificial Intelligence (AI), he has managed to categorize the person, age, type of crime, and various other information about them. 

In all of his findings, Chen’s analysis of over 2,000 FBI cases found a common theme. 

“One thing I noticed, which is quite surprising, is how many law enforcement officers, the police officers, sheriffs, etc., were involved in corruption,” Chen said.

The conclusion that Lawrence and Fixin’ San Mateo reached was similar to the one Chen and Anechiarico reached. The sluggishness to address corruption was simply not good enough. Agencies working in isolation are simply not conducive to an integrable government. 

“The anti-corruption system in the United States is fragmented. Different agencies, no communication, no collaboration. You need one agency specialized in anti-corruption to have resources and personnel to focus on specific cases,” Chen said.