El Ciudadano
Original article: Polémica en Las Condes: Cuestionan millonario arriendo y corretaje de Corporación de Educación sin licitación
Controversy in Las Condes: Questions Arise Over Million-Dollar Lease and Brokerage Fees for Education Corporation Without Tender
As the institution grapples with a crisis stemming from deficits in its school integration programs, it has engaged in a direct leasing agreement for a property located at Reyes Lavalle (former bank branch) with an estimated monthly rent of approximately $10 million – the exact amount remains unverifiable as the Corporation has not published the contract in accordance with active transparency requirements, compounded by a similar payment to the brokerage firm Colliers without prior bidding.
By El Ciudadano Investigation Team
The situation came to light following an administrative complaint alleging potential irregularities and violations of administrative integrity principles against the Education and Health Corporation of Las Condes submitted to the Comptroller’s Office, requesting an investigation in accordance with the law.
According to an expanded complaint presented by attorney Pablo Peribonio, which El Ciudadano accessed, the Education and Health Corporation of Las Condes is described in the document as having incurred a «luxurious expenditure without competitive process». The legal action highlights the rental of offices in a highly valued area and the substantial payment of a commission to Colliers, both agreements executed through direct negotiation.
This complaint is part of a broader investigation under file number MTR E157550/25, which documents, among other things, the irregular hiring of a chatbot by Executive Secretary Nicolás Pizarro Juliá from Eugenio Aguiló Armstrong – a university peer and cabinet colleague during Cathy Barriga’s administration in Maipú – utilizing public funds for personal coaching for Director of Administration and Finance Felipe Cox Oddo, and a backlog of 650 children with special educational needs.
The document claims that the Education and Health Corporation of Las Condes leased a property for administrative functions of the Central House, in one of the capital’s highest-value areas, Reyes Lavalle, for a monthly amount nearing $10 million. It alleges that the agreement was made without a bidding process, market studies, or a justification of institutional needs to warrant such an elevated expenditure.
The controversy extends beyond the property lease, encompassing Purchase Order No. 136108, issued on January 21, 2026. Through this document, the Education and Health Corporation of Las Condes disbursed $12,014,739 to Colliers Prosin S.A. for brokerage commission.
Purchase Order No. 136108 was signed by Felipe Cox Oddo, Director of Administration and Finance, and serves as the official document presented to the Comptroller’s Office.
For the complainant, this payment presents significant evidential value warranting detailed analysis, particularly as the commission paid to the broker exceeds the value of one month’s rent, demonstrating the substantial administrative resources the Corporation is willing to expend on real estate management whose true utility for the institution remains questionable.
Moreover, the payment was made without any competitive process: no bidding, no quotes from other brokers, and no duly founded resolution justifying the direct engagement with Colliers.
In this context, the complaint notes that the payment of a commission for office searches does not correlate with the essential functions of the Corporation, which are solely focused on education and health. This direct payment, alongside the monthly rental fee (approximately 10 million pesos), totals over 22 million pesos merely to equip a property located on Reyes Lavalle, one of the capital’s most expensive areas. The gravity of the situation lies not only in the amount but also in the fact that the space is meant to accommodate a significantly smaller administrative team than that which the property can physically support, considerably distant from where beneficiaries receive direct services, raising questions about the prudence and efficiency in utilizing funds allocated to public education.
Questioned Priorities: Expenditures Versus Shortfalls in the PIE
According to the background presented in an expanded complaint submitted to the General Comptroller’s Office (MTR E157550/25), this administrative expenditure sharply contrasts with the financial situation of the community’s schools.
The complaint states that while the Corporation paid about $12 million to Colliers for searching for an office, its PIE program has accumulated annual losses of over $526 million due to unutilized spots, with 650 students waiting to enter the school integration program, without any purchasing processes underway, and outdated evaluation regulations across all facilities, eight years after the implementation of Decree No. 67.
The complainant emphasized, “The deadline is May 8, 2026. There is no Director of Education or technical person in charge of the PIE. It was the Director of Education, María Ester Silva – who was dismissed by Pizarro Juliá without due process guarantees – who commissioned the audit documenting this situation and called for urgent actions.”
“The choice of where to spend and where not to spend speaks volumes about the actual priorities of the administration,” the document states.
Furthermore, the complaint clarifies that according to Article 3 of Law No. 18.575 and the principle of state service, public resources must be allocated to meet the needs of the people and not for the administrative comfort of those managing the institutions.
“A brokerage commission of $12,014,739 paid without a competitive process, to lease high-end offices that accommodate the administration of a corporation neglecting hundreds of children with special educational needs, epitomizes the misguided investment priorities this complaint seeks to bring to the attention of the oversight entity,” the document asserts.
In conclusion, the complaint to the oversight body scrutinizes the legality and appropriateness of this million-dollar direct deal, demanding to ascertain whether the expenditure violates public procurement regulations and the principles of probity governing the use of funds dedicated to community education.
The expanded complaint emphatically calls on the Comptroller to verify, firstly, whether Purchase Order No. 136108 meets the required justification and competitive process stipulated by Law No. 19.886; secondly, to ascertain if there exists an administrative act that backs and justifies the direct engagement with Colliers; thirdly, to clarify if the expenditure is correctly allocated in the corporate budget and has been approved by the competent body; and finally, to verify if the decision to lease the property was supported by prior evaluations of different alternatives justifying the convenience of the agreed monthly rate.
Ultimately, the request aims to determine whether there was arbitrary use of public resources or if the principles of transparency and probity were violated in the Corporation’s management.
Reactions from the Las Condes Municipal Council
In a conversation with El Ciudadano, Las Condes councilor and President of the Education Commission, Guillermo Ureta Larraín (UDI), stated that, at first glance, the expense raises legitimate concerns about its proportionality, indicating that this refers to a cost nearing $10 million for a limited team in a high-value location.
“As the President of the Education Commission, I believe that such decisions must be adequately justified in technical, operational, and economic terms. So far, that explanation has not been provided to the Council or the community,” he stated.
He added that the Council has yet to receive information regarding the property or its owners, nor the criteria that justified the direct hiring. He noted that this information is essential for them to adequately fulfill their oversight role, and a formal request will be made for it.
Furthermore, he stated that if the infrastructure indeed exceeds the technical requirements of the team, there could be inefficiency in the use of public resources, particularly in a context where critical needs exist in municipal education, necessitating careful prioritization of every dollar spent. Thus, he emphasized the importance of clarifying this point alongside objective supporting evidence.
Regarding the payment to Colliers, the councilor indicated that “both the Corporation and the municipality have their own infrastructure, making it even more necessary to understand why this alternative was chosen. Additionally, the payment of a significant brokerage commission without bidding reinforces the need for a comprehensive explanation regarding the decision. When it comes to public resources, the principle must always be maximum efficiency and transparency.”
Finally, he noted that thus far, the Council has not received a substantiated explanation regarding the choice of the property or the absence of a competitive process. “Rather than issuing premature judgments, it is responsible to demand that the authority provide all the supporting information justifying the adopted decision.”
On another note, the El Ciudadano team spoke with Las Condes councilor, Nayati Mahmoud, who stated that the associated amount is undeniably high and that these funds could be allocated to other areas. “However, just to be precise, I understand that there are more than 10 staff working there. I’m not sure if that’s enough to justify the rented space, but there are indeed over 10,” she said.
She also mentioned that she knows the identity of the property owner; however, she preferred to withhold the name, arguing that, as far as she knows, there would be no connection that represents a conflict of interest between her, the mayor, or any municipal official.
Concerning the property’s characteristics, she indicated that she cannot ascertain whether it consists of luxurious facilities, as she has not visited them in person. “Therefore, I also cannot state whether it meets the team’s technical needs. I would very much like to talk with those who have reservations about this because if, indeed, the expenditure and space cannot be justified, it is a decision that should be reviewed by the individuals who made it,” she added.
Furthermore, she noted that it is essential to optimize resources, ensuring that the bulk of the budget, or a significant proportion, is dedicated to directly benefiting the Corporation’s users.
“Still, keeping perspective, it is also essential that our staff have dignified spaces where they can work comfortably. This, without resulting in unjustified multimillion-dollar leases, if they exist,” she clarified.
Regarding the substantial payment to Colliers, she stated that they are not informed about all the decisions the Corporation makes, as it is a private entity rather than strictly municipal.
“In fact, we were also not informed in advance about the lease of this property, so the information we have is what we are able to find on our own. But intuitively, I imagine that the location decision is due to its proximity to the central department and, as expected, the costs involved in this area are exceptionally high,” she commented.
Finally, she indicated that there have been no explanations regarding the matter. She added that while she would like to receive background context or information beforehand for transparency reasons, it is not mandatory for it to go through them.
“Especially because there have been problems with communication with the General Secretary, specifically regarding the intentions of councilors to visit educational facilities. This has made it more challenging to access information considering how relationships have proceeded lately,” she concluded.
The Defense and Explanations from the Education Corporation
The team at El Ciudadano contacted the Education and Health Corporation of Las Condes, who stated that the rent for the offices at Reyes Lavalle 3194 (offices 102 and 202) costs 212.55 UF plus VAT (around $8.5 million). Additionally, the entity clarifies that they operate with 32 people – more than half of the Central House – expecting to reach a maximum of 46 as per the space’s capacity.
“Additionally, the Education and Health Corporation of Las Condes is a separate legal entity from the Municipality and therefore cannot use municipal spaces,” they added.
Regarding the brokerage commission, they noted that “the payment for the brokerage commission amounted to UF 254 plus VAT. An amount that, according to the contract stipulations, corresponds to 2% of the total contract amount, which is for 60 months of rent (5 years).”
They further clarified that the corporation, as a non-profit private legal entity, is authorized to pay brokerage commissions, a common practice that has been in place for years and was not initiated by the current administration. Additionally, they emphasized that it is a standard and unavoidable charge in the real estate market for such contracts.
“Since the rental contracts for properties are exempt from the procurement law, so a direct negotiation was not used for this hiring. The brokerage is associated with the property, with the broker chosen by the owner and not by the Corporation,” they stated.
“However, Purchase Order No. 136108 states expressly the Tenant’s commission to Colliers and is signed by Felipe Cox Oddo. Whoever pays the broker is the client. If the Corporation paid with public funds, they chose to do so. What would have happened if the owner had selected a broker charging double? Would the Corporation have paid $24 million in educational funds without complaint?” challenged the complainant.
On another note, regarding the property owners, they clarified that the owners are María Luz Baldrich Matheits and María Eugenia Baldrich Matheits, who lease it to the real estate firm M-R Limitada, whose legal representative is Mary Luz Matheits Ruiz.
“It was with this company that the contract was signed, there is no relationship or conflict of interest of any kind with these individuals, nor has any person or official reported such a conflict,” they clarified.
Lastly, they pointed out that the public procurement law governs the onerous contracts signed by state organizations to procure goods and services, and that real estate leasing contracts are not subject to the provisions of this law.
“The choice of this particular property responds to objective criteria, particularly the strategic location of the property, located right across from the Corporation’s Central House, which allowed for prioritizing proximity and team collaboration, being a compelling reason that saves on transportation and commuting time, considering that there were numerous employees performing duties at various locations across the municipality,” they added.
For the complainant, “The proximity argument does not withstand basic scrutiny. The schools servicing those employees are at Colón with Paul Harris, Camino del Alba, Tomás Moro, on the other side of the municipality. Central offices still have available spaces. If there was space there, why waste education funds on renting luxury offices in Santiago’s most expensive neighborhood?”
Lastly, they dismissed allegations of a lack of transparency in the process, stating that the hiring adhered to current regulations, market values, necessity, and justification for the contract, formalized under standard leasing terms, which fall under private law.
While the complainant insists that “neither the lease contract nor the brokerage order were published in active transparency as of the date of the complaint. This pattern is not new – the contract with Impacte SpA also lacked public backing until the day it was queried by the press. The Transparency Council detected in March 2026 widespread non-compliance in the municipal leasing contract publications. Although leases are exempt from the Procurement Law, Article 9 of Law No. 18.575 requires the use of some competitive mechanism or a well-founded justification for why not. That act does not exist. Omitting it contravenes the principle of probity under Article 62 No. 7. Public resources must not only be spent legally – they must be spent justifiably. There is additionally a precedent that this administration cannot ignore: a similar situation occurred with the purchase of properties for the third CESFAM – without competitive processes and with brokerage fees without bidding. The Comptroller observed those contracts, and an inquiry was initiated. It was the Mayor San Martín herself, while she was a councilor, who reported those irregularities. The question arises: did the lesson get learned? And who will be responsible for the inquiry this time?”
The Case Under Scrutiny of the Oversight Body
The controversy surrounding the rental of offices on Reyes Lavalle highlights the management of resources in the community. The debate centers on whether these administrative expenditures are proportional to the urgent needs in municipal education and health.
As the oversight entity reviews the legality of the contracts, council members demand greater transparency and technical explanations. The community awaits a resolution to determine whether probity was respected in the use of public funds.
Ultimately, the case underscores the urgency to redirect the budget towards the needs of users and students. The outcome of the Comptroller’s review will be crucial in defining the standards of integrity that will govern the Corporation.
By El Ciudadano Investigation Team
La entrada Controversy in Las Condes: Questions Arise Over Million-Dollar Lease and Brokerage Fees for Education Corporation Without Tender se publicó primero en El Ciudadano.
🔥 Ver noticia completa en ElCiudadano.cl 🔥
