To readers, these are opinions based on facts and history. 

Robin Hood, a heroic outlaw who robbed from the rich to feed the poor is a classic story derived from English folklore that finds its way in literature and theatre . Like Charles Dickens’ Tale of Two Cities, this is rather a tale of two Robin Hoods. Robin Hood the Good as stated above and Robin Hood the Bad. 

The City of Santa Clara and the Santa Clara Players currently has a theatrical production underway—at least metaphorically—called Robin Hood the Bad, starring none other than Mayor Lisa Gillmor in the title role. In this gender-swapped, role-reversed version of the classic tale, Mayor Lisa “Robin Hood” Gillmor steals from the people to advance and feed her own political agenda rather than helping feed the people. District Attorney Jeff Rosen plays the Sheriff of Santa Clara County, a sheriff who looks the other way as Robin Hood pillages the people because, in this telling, he too benefits from their misfortune.

Unfortunately no production exists, however the stark reality is the City of Santa Clara and its people have been living under Mayor Gillmor’s reverse Robin Hood for decades.  Let’s go through the laundry list of her record. 

Gillmor uses this city as a personal piggy bank. “Gillmor be robbin’ the ‘hood”—Santa Clara neighborhoods and the great people of this city. Gillmor uses the system, from city hall to grand juries to District Attorneys to do the bidding of her agenda which at the end of the day costs the taxpayer. The Civil Grand Jury, District Attorney, FPPC, SCPD, City of Santa Clara all the entities’ investigations all cost the taxpayer something. 

From the late 1980’s when Gillmor started the crusade against the City with the 1987 grand jury report that was critical of the council who didn’t listen to her concerns as a Parks and Recreation Commission Chair. The investigation and results forced Santa Clara to identify its lack of emphasis on the code of ethics rather than just conflicts of interest and the lack of annual performance reviews of the city manager and city attorney. The recommendations in that 1987 grand jury report read like the early playbook of Lisa Gillmor that continues today. The repeated narrative that finds its way skipping through time, a play that never fails her.  It looks very obvious Lisa Gillmor’s influence swayed that grand jury report to be released a year before her first attempt at running for city council.  It is always about ethics, always about conflicts, always about losing money or someone or something out of compliance to “her standards”. God forbid you question her about the same. 

In 1991 Lisa Gillmor continued to stir up trouble when she was on a civil grand jury where she led the crusade against the Department of Corrections releasing a report critical of the department and leaving the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors Rod Diridon, Ron Gonzales, Zoe Lofgren, Mike Honda and Dianne McKeena to deal with the fallout. From claims of poor treatment of inmates to questionable hiring practices the report was often said to be “thin and poorly sustained”.  This was a knee jerk reaction to 1988 when the creation of the Department of Corrections was on the ballot by the Board of Supervisors. Lisa Gillmor had donated $1,000 against the initiative. When it didn’t go her way, she used the system to get an outcome she wanted by applying and getting appointed to the civil grand jury and made the newly created Department of Corrections her target. Some say Lisa Gillmor had ties to Bob Winter the Sheriff at the time who was against the Department of Corrections creation and the transfer of management of the jails from his power as the Sheriff to the power of the Board of Supervisors. Some further reading of that saga, https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-01-28-me-1271-story.html . When the civil grand jury, of which Lisa Gillmor was a member, released its June 1991 report, Department of Corrections Director Frank Hall said , “immense damage” was done to the department and was “flatly wrong and I’m not going to guess the motives, But I’m chagrined they would release a report without a foundation in fact, I will certainly be looking at motivation, at this point”. Sgt. Al Siegling, head of the Santa Clara County Correctional Peace Officers Association at the time suggested that the jury may have been “motivated as much by politics as a search for the truth”. Siegling also at the time singled out at least one member, Lisa Gillmor of the 19-person civil grand jury, mentioning her contribution to the political campaign to prevent the Department’s creation.   Everyone had Gillmor’s number and knew her influence was there. Supervisor Dianne McKeena said at the time that the “report is very thin on information and material to back up a lot of the claims it makes“. Lisa Gillmor later resigned from the grand jury the following year before she ran for City Council the second time. She did all this damage in between her unsuccessful campaign for council in 1988 and her successful campaign for council in 1992. Think of it, all the money spent by the county to fix the damage Gillmor’s influence on the civil grand jury did. All the time and money spent by the civil grand jury just looking to political truth rather than the real truth. 

In 1993 and 1994 Lisa Gillmor led the famous Chamber of Commerce and Convention Center crusades with Mayor Eddie Souza. Gillmor and Souza claimed mismanagement, embezzlement leading to city investigations, audits, and man hours to prove Gillmor and Souza’s accusations and claims. Betty Hangs, the President of the Chamber of Commerce at the time, was grilled for 6 hours during a council meeting by Souza and Gillmor. The chamber itself spent $20,000 and hundreds of hours gathering answers to Lisa Gillmor’s questions to only have Gillmor say that she is being “stonewalled” despite being given the information she demanded— “stonewalled” a line that is deja vu for her beef with the 49ers. Gillmor back then was willing to spend $100,000 on a further convention center audit, yet it was Councilmember Tim Jefferies who changed his mind not to spend the $100,000 on audit, Councilmember Gillmor and Mayor Souza made life hell for Jefferies and ran him out of town later down the road. The heavy media coverage of the dispute between Gillmor, the City Manager Jennifer Sparacino and the Chamber of Commerce and Convention Center led to the civil grand jury intervening. Gillmor filed numerous complaints related to her accusations. After all the time, resources and money the grand jury spent on investigating these claims, it resulted in a nothingburger report that put Gillmor’s false claims to rest. However that didn’t stop Lisa Gillmor who held a grudge for 24 years coming back to destroy the chamber of commerce and convention center in 2018. Gillmor spent taxpayer money for a vendetta 24 years in the making. Gillmor first spent taxpayer money in 1993-1994 for all the man-hours and documentation by city staff including consultants. At the time City Manager Jennifer Sparacino had to state that the “accusations damaged the city’s reputation”. Then in 2018 with Gillmor’s hand picked City Manager Deanna Santana they spent more taxpayer money to give the illusion that the convention center was a “money loser” and there was mismanagement and self dealing. Gillmor got the outcome she wanted through the resources of the city and tax payers money to destroy something out of revenge. She fired a bunch of people who were experts to then wonder why today the business is dismal. Gillmor not only wasted City of Santa Clara taxpayers money from two investigations and audits of the convention center in 1993/94 and 2018 but also wasted the Civil Grand Jury’s time and money in 1993/94 for investigating her and Mayor Eddie Souza’s unsupported claims.  Gillmor spent millions trying to rebuild the chamber and the convention center in her image following its destruction in 2018. Gillmor has robbed the City of potential millions in revenue from these vendettas with the convention center.  The costs of terminating the CVB and loss of tourism is unforgivable.   

In 1995, Gillmor spent more city council time and city management hours after the 1994 Mayors Elections claiming her former opponent Mayor Judy Nadler didn’t report postage in her campaign. Gillmor used this to distract from the drive to recall Jim Arno, her ally on council who got caught in some shady shenanigans with Mission Trails. Gillmor had an FPPC complaint filed against Mayor Judy Nadler. Gillmor demanded “Where’s the postage? This could end right now if you tell us where the postage is, This issue is not going away”. The FPPC rejected Gillmor’s claims of Mayor Judy Nadler as an unethical campaign law violator. Following the ordeal, Mayor Judy Nadler called on her council colleagues to refrain from using the city council meetings, city money and staff time to settle the old “political scores”. Those comments by Judy Nadler were specifically directed at Lisa Gillmor and are even more reflective today in Lisa Gillmor’s kangaroo court city council. 

In 2015 and 2016, The civil grand jury investigated Gillmor’s complaints about potential violations of Measure J. This led to the resignation of Jamie Matthews as Mayor who has not been seen for a decade since and City Manager Julio Fuentes. Gillmor successfully purged city hall and assumed the throne as Mayor. This all then led to a Civil Grand Jury report in June of 2016 highlighting Measure J “issues” for a stadium only open for two years. Just like the newly made Department of Corrections getting a grand jury report in 1991 after its creation three years earlier in 1988, the Civil Grand Jury released a report before the 2016 city council elections critical of the stadium that opened in 2014 that again was only in operation for barely two years. That grand jury report was then the basis that led to costly audits from costly consultants. Gillmor approved $180,000 of your money for an audit by consultant Harvey Rose to talk about 37 recommendations to improve “transparency, management of the stadium, and accounting practices”. It found that money that was owed was small however it was also the lack of billing by the city. So in reality it is saying they are not paying the bills when they never sent the bill. It created the illusion that the 49ers are not paying the city, something the Gillmor Machine cult swears by. By 2017 the relationship between the city and the 49ers soured and by 2018 and 2019 Gillmor was eyeing to eliminate the 49ers as management of the stadium, feeling she could do a better job with her replacement. It began with accusations of failure to secure events that made the city money. One time a press conference at city hall spent money creating large report cards with an “F” on it, showing the 49ers failing in multiple categories. Gillmor and City Manager Deanna Santana talked about “money losing events”. There is that phrase again, “money losing,money loser—tomato, tomoto”. The claims of wage theft and lack of transparency, the list was long, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1j-_2YCbGH4 . 

Gillmor unleashed her full arsenal for her feud against the 49ers. By September 2019 the city led by Gillmor ended the agreement that enabled the 49ers to manage non-NFL events at the stadium because of the “money-loser” events booked by 49ers. In result the 49ers sued for breach of contracts keeping the 49ers in charge while the issues were worked out in court. Yet by February 2020 in closed session right before the pandemic lockdowns the city council again led by Gillmor voted to terminate the stadium management agreement with the 49ers in its entirety and called for new third party management to take over both NFL and non-NFL events. Gillmor had escalated the situation by taking it to another level. Unable to wait for the court to resolve the 49ers’ lawsuit—which had barred the City from managing non-NFL events—Gillmor moved to terminate the arrangement after only four and a half months. Gillmor did this before the 2020 elections and she was gambling on the backs of Santa Clara taxpayers by going against a multi-billion dollar football franchise in court.  It would then lead to tons of litigation that was costly to the city and prevented money, like performance rent from reaching the general fund. Gillmor would later claim that performance rent was not reaching the City, implying that the 49ers were withholding money owed to Santa Clara. In reality, the performance-rent stream had been undermined by the costly legal battles between the City and the team, with funds being consumed by legal defense expenses generated by the disputes she helped create. Gillmor used the city’s legal defenses to fund her fights with the 49ers, not for the city of Santa Clara but for her own ego and own agenda. Simple Revenge, paid for by you. 

You cannot forget the legal costs to the city from fighting the voting rights lawsuit, losing not once but twice after a costly appeal. Gillmor and Former City Attorney Brian Doyle hid a settlement proposal to save the city money. The result was they lost the city millions to those suing the city. All the money spent by the city on behalf of Gillmor fighting the judges orders to put Santa Clara into six districts in 2018 was astronomical, from two failed ballot measures that tried twice to reduce the number of districts the judge ordered. All ballot measures were driven by Gillmor and her Machine. Gillmor used the taxpayers to fight back against the districts which threatened her power. She used the city like charging a credit card to try to maintain her power. These are great legal costs on the backs of the taxpayers who today wonder why the city can’t have good things or why cut backs on certain essential services.  Remember their names: Former disgraced City Attorney Brian Doyle, former disgraced City Manager Deanna Santana, Former Councilmember-current School Board Member-Mayoral candidate Kathy Watanabe, former Councilmembers Teresa O’Neill and Debi Davis are all complicit with Gillmor in these losses and costs. Spending your money like their personal checking account for their cruel agenda and when they don’t agree with something. Other legal issues that Gillmor got the city into were spending taxpayer money to battle her allies in court. When the city council voted to put on the ballot the change from elected chief of police and city clerk to appointed roles by the City Manager, Gillmor pulled out all the stops. Gillmor and the Police Union rejected the ballot measure and its language and pushed hard to not allow it to be on the ballot. Gillmor allies, Satish Chandra, Joyce Davis and Carolyn McCallister sued the city over the same language Gillmor objected to in the ballot measure. Gillmor and then Councilmember Watanabe were playing both sides of the legal coin. Both were supposed to defend the city in their elected roles but on the other hand were helping and supportive of the people suing the city. Gillmor and Watanabe would probably sue if they could have but Gillmor never does the dirty work herself; it is always a proxy. Power hides in the shadows and she is never left holding the knife. Essentially Gillmor and Watanabe were sitting in closed sessions hearing the city attorney’s strategy to fight the lawsuit brought by their allies while also using it against the city. The lawsuit ultimately brought against the city failed in court, but it cost the city time and money. Following that, Gillmor and the Police Union made sure the ballot measure failed and retained the elected chief of police and city clerk roles in their favor. Satish Chandra who was on the lawsuit against the city was endorsed by Gillmor and District Attorney Jeff Rosen in the 2024 election cycle while Joyce Davis the co-filer of the suit was on the now non-active Diversity Equity Task force appointed by Gillmor and former Police Chief Pat Nikolai. Gillmor and Watanabe playing both sides of the legal game and using the city’s legal defenses to fight others, what kind of ethics is that? 

When Gillmor lost her majority in 2020 that didn’t stop her. Gillmor just relied on some tricky plays of the past from her playbook. The civil grand jury was the avenue she would use to defame the new city council members and new majority at the time. She used the civil grand jury, the FPPC, to intimidate all her political opponents. This robbed political opponents of time, money, and reputation. Then there are the costs Gillmor inflicted on the city and county through the 2022 and 2024 civil grand jury reports. Investigations and publishing reports by the civil grand jury about her political opponents, investigations by the District Attorney into her political opponents and the indictment, the trial and conviction of her political opponent all while remaining untouched or prosecuted because of political alliances—again all costs to taxpayers of the county. While in the city of Santa Clara the man-hours, money and resources to respond to multiple civil grand jury reports and trying to implement all the recommendations. Furthermore, there are the costs the city paid for consultants to conduct investigations into accusations of Councilmembers abusing each or a former city manager. It keeps adding up on your dime. 

Gillmor gets taxpayers to cover her police and fire raises while complaining about a private corporation investing into our elections. These same police and fire unions take their raises and invest it into the elections supporting her hand picked candidates.  Gillmor is stealing from the voters and taxpayers to fund her political arsenal while claiming how bad the 49ers are in our elections. Again the 49ers are a private company versus Gillmor using the police and fire unions which taxpayers pay for. Gillmor treats the union’s political support and city finances like Jed York’s use of his own personal unlimited money. Gillmor uses other people’s money. Take away all the city money, the police union and fire union, the developers, what does she have? Yes, her own wealth, wealth she does not spend. Instead Gillmor robs you daily.  

Add in the lack of money from the Related Company, essentially robbing the city by just sitting on land for a decade. Related, don’t pay the city nor deliver a project that is well overdue. Gillmor allows this robbery of the city by Related because it benefits her and her candidates in elections. Never any of these shady deals with Related are under any scrutiny and never investigated like that of the 49ers and Gillmor’s political opponents. Instead, Gillmor frequently accuses the 49ers of depriving residents of money, while the reality is her own actions contributed to losses across the board. Projection is one of Gillmor’s most effective political tactics that seems to work every time, and people always believe her.  Why is that? 

And now, the voters in 2024 gave Gillmor $400 million dollars “blank check” to divide between her police and fire unions– her bread and butter for elections. This bond measure also bailed her out for her failed leadership in not fixing infrastructure, swim centers, etc. Instead she spent city money on legal battles and fruitless searches. Now a swim center and other infrastructure that had to be put out for a bond measure now gives Gillmor the ability to claim credit for fixing all things and blaming others on city council while fronting the bill on the backs of the taxpayer.  

The record is clear, a lengthy one. A record that cannot be denied and should not be rewarded with any sort of reelection to the city council and that includes any of her friends. Gillmor will cost you. She will rob you. Cost after cost, fruitless searches, spend, spend, spend. Just imagine all the costs to the city and county by Gillmor and her great Machine that we cannot see, like an iceberg, there is plenty more to see below the surface. Look at history. What is past is prologue. Past actions explain present and future actions and decisions. Of all of it regardless of where it is categorized, ultimately who foots the bill? You

Santa Clara is not merely a plutocracy, where wealth dominates political power, nor merely a kakistocracy, where the least qualified rise to leadership, or not just a kleptocracy where corrupt thieves rule.  It is a “Pluto-Klepto-Kakistocracy”—a system in which wealth, self-interest, thievery and incompetence operate together. Santa Clara, The Mission City is governed by the worst combination of the wealthy, self-serving thieves, and most importantly the unqualified. Santa Clara is a prime example of Royal Feudalism. 

Robin Hood the Good stole from the rich to feed the poor. Robin Hood the Bad does the opposite. Lisa Gillmor’s legacy is not one of building Santa Clara up, but of treating the City as a political battleground where taxpayers are left to absorb the costs. Every investigation, lawsuit, political feud, and exercise of power comes with a bill, and that bill is ultimately paid by the people of Santa Clara or the people of the County. 

The common thread running through decades of controversy is not whether every accusation is true or every decision was wrong. It is the trail of costs left behind: damaged reputations, divided communities, taxpayer-funded legal battles, lost opportunities, and a City Hall culture that too often appears to serve political interests before public interests. Behind it lies a trail of tears, disappointment, and hardship—a cost that for many has been too great to bear. 

The Bank of the City of Santa Clara should not be a checking account for Gillmor’s political vendettas, nor should it function as a line of credit for the Great Gillmor Machine. When looking at the City’s history, ask yourself the following questions: Where is the accounting? Where is the audit of the costs imposed on Santa Clara taxpayers by Gillmor? Where is the scrutiny from other media that claims to watch those in power? And where is the accountability for decades of decisions whose costs were borne by residents, not politicians? There has been immense damage done and long term reputational harm to the city and its leaders not aligned with Gillmor. 

Perhaps the most troubling question is whether all of this reflects a modern version of “Let them eat cake“—a governing mentality so insulated from the consequences that the burdens placed on ordinary residents become invisible. The phrase has endured through history because it captures the danger of leaders becoming disconnected from the people they serve. Gillmor is far disconnected from the people she is supposed to serve. It is as if the people and the city serve her. 

The story of Robin Hood has always been about who benefits and who pays. In the Santa Clara version, the people seem to be doing most of the paying while Gillmor is doing most of the benefitting and profiting. 

The future has yet to be written. Voters come November will decide whether to continue down the same path by electing Gillmor allies and political successors, or whether it is time to close the book on the era of Robin Hood the Bad. If Santa Clarans want a different future, accountability cannot be someone else’s responsibility. It belongs to the voters and all of us. After all, if “Gillmor be robbin’ the ‘hood,” the question is not whether the theft is visible. Santa Clarans are being robbed transparently, not robbed blind.  People can see it. The question is how much longer Santa Clara is willing to watch it happen.

How naive, or to put it bluntly, how stupid will voters be to support a Mayor Watanabe or any continued rule and influence from Lisa Gillmor and the Great Gillmor Machine. Can’t say I didn’t warn you, it is what you get with the Gillmor Machine and Santa Clara, The Center of What’s Corrupt.

-Roger Kint