The first two meetings of Santa Clara’s new charter review committee were focused on organization, process and putting together a work plan.
City council approved the creation of the committee at its July 15 meeting and appointed the 13 members at the Sept. 16 meeting. The committee’s goal is to complete its work next June, in time for a Nov. 2026 ballot measure.
The council appointed: Mark Boeckman, John Brooks, Eric Crutchlow, Lauren Diamond, Burt Field, Eric Jensen, Steve Kelly, Mohammad Naveed, Pat Nikolai, Susan Peters, Holly Rhea Roberts, Joe Sosinski and Bernard Thamsey.
At its first meeting last month, the committee elected former police chief Pat Nikolai as chair and Joe Sosinski as Vice Chair.
At the second meeting, the group formed six subcommittees that will focus on specific parts of the charter. Unlike past charter reviews, this effort is a comprehensive overhaul of the entire charter, and the goal is a single 2026 ballot proposal for a comprehensive revision.
Santa Clara’s charter was written in 1950, and time has rendered some of its provisions outmoded — for example, the charter requires council approval for expenditures over $1,000 — that would be about $13,500 in 2025 dollars. Other provisions don’t reflect current city practices or contemporary best practices in public administration, according to City Attorney Glen Googins.
The proposed changes will be brought to the city council in three groups: Level 1 changes are corrections and reorganizations. Level 2 changes are ones that align the city’s operations with accepted best practices. The last group, level 3, are changes so substantial or potentially controversial that Council may wish to consider them separately or not at all.
The city attorney’s office made subcommittee assignments based on members’ preferences when possible:
- Powers and Structure of City Government: Rules/Process for Action: Tansey, Nikolai and Jensen
- City Council: Elections, Powers and Conduct of Meeting: Kelly, Boeckman, Crutchlow, Roberts and Peters
- Senior Officials: Duties and Qualifications: Tansey, Nikolai, Diamond and Naveed
- Boards and Commissions: Composition, Powers and Duties: Diamond, Brooks, Field Sosinski
- Civil Service: General Rules for Classified and Unclassified Employees, Commission Composition and Duties: Peters, Boeckman, Roberts and Naveed
- Fiscal Administration and Procurement: Crutchlow, Brooks and Field
Subcommittees Not Subject to Open Meeting Laws
Ad hoc “advisory” subcommittees aren’t subject to California’s open meetings law, the Brown Act, as long as they are temporary, the members don’t make up a quorum of the whole committee, exist to address a single task —“ad hoc” — and the subcommittee sets its own schedule for meetings.*
Exemption from the Brown Act means they don’t have to publish agendas and minutes, and meetings aren’t necessarily open to the public.
“You don’t [have to take minutes],” said City Attorney Glenn Googins, but “I think it would be a good idea … for someone to make notes of what your meeting consisted of, because that will facilitate your report out to the larger committee.”
Members of the city attorney’s office will attend all subcommittee meetings.
If subcommittee members discuss their work with other members of the larger committee, they risk violating the Brown Act with a “serial meeting” — something that can happen easily with social media.
Resident Michele Ryan raised concerns about committee transparency.
“It was said that the data on the subcommittee preference was shared with the committee and it was made public,” said Ryan. “But it is not available online to the public. Materials that were provided to the committee are not available to the public. So that, I think, needs to be corrected.”
City Attorney Googins explained that this information was distributed to the committee at the meeting and would be “available as soon as possible.”
Conflicts of Interest?
Ryan had a second question, saying that it was “concerning that the former chief of police [Nikolai], who may still have strong connections, is assigned to the group that is dealing with senior officials. It seems that that presents an appearance of conflict of interest.”
Nikolai is a close political ally of Mayor Lisa Gillmor, and was a leader in opposing a charter change to appoint, rather than elect, Santa Clara’s police chief. Nikolai, who retired in 2024, was the longtime president of the police union before being elected police chief when the prior chief, Mike Sellers, retired in 2019.
Googins didn’t see a conflict, “certainly not a conflict under the Political Reform Act, because there’s no financial interest. I’m not seeing a conflict that would apply and limit you [Nikolai], at least in the formation of the committees and your appointment to it, Mr. Chair. If you had a one, we could look into it a little bit deeper before you actually participate on that committee.”
The next Charter Review Committee meeting is scheduled for Nov. 19, 2025. The meetings are streamed on Zoom and are available on the city website the following week.
Zoom link: https://santaclaraca.zoom.us/j/86127408402, ID 861 2740 840.
Phone: (669) 444-9171.
*The First Amendment Coalition has a discussion about the application of the Brown Act to ad hoc subcommittees: firstamendmentcoalition.org/asked-and-answered/how-does-the-brown-act-apply-to-ad-hoc-versus-standing-committees/
With these subcommittee assignments, Santa Clara faces two significant challenges that threaten civic engagement within the City Council and the broader management of the City.
Concerns About Leadership Qualifications
There are serious concerns about Nikolai’s suitability to influence key areas, including the Powers and Structure of City Government and the Duties and Qualifications of Senior Officials. As a sergeant in the police department and head of the employee union, Nikolai opposed the dismissal of officers with sustained records of racism and misconduct. Previous police chiefs have noted that Nikolai did not pursue the necessary training or education to advance to supervisory roles, such as lieutenant or captain. Nikolai was elected police chief only because Santa Clara’s charter restricts qualified candidates from outside the area from running for council.
Although Nikolai claimed to hold a college degree—a credential commonly pursued by junior officers—no evidence was ever provided. A police chief with a university education would likely be better equipped to interview lateral police officers. Instead, Nikolai hired Amanda Theodosy-Nash, who pleaded guilty to felonies and served 90 days in prison. Additionally, two close friends, Brian Gilbert and Phil Cooke, were also convicted of felonies.
For further details, see:
• https://www.leoratings.com/index.php?title=Amanda_Theodosy-Nash
• https://www.svvoice.com/city-releases-investigation-report-20-months-after-it-was-finished-and-6-hours-after-editorial-slamming-citys-inaction/
Currently, the minimum requirements to run for police chief in Santa Clara are a G.E.D. and four years of full-time employment as a peace officer.
A responsible Charter Committee should recommend that the City Council:
• Remove in-city residency requirements for police chief candidates.
• Require a post-graduate degree and senior law enforcement leadership certification for all police chief candidates.
• Mandate that full-time emergency services personnel (police and fire) reside within a one-hour commute of Santa Clara.
Another area of concern is the assignment of Burt Field to the Boards and Commissions and Fiscal Responsibility subcommittees. Burt Field has openly expressed a desire for retribution after being dismissed from the Parks and Recreation Committee. He is likely to advocate for policies that prevent the rejection or denial of committee nominations. Burt Field has also claimed to have “almost completed one full semester” at community college, which raises questions about his academic, fiscal, and managerial qualifications to determine budgetary policies.
Santa Clara residents need to support others on the Charter Committee to keep both Pat Nikolai and Burt Field in narrow swim lanes so they don’t influence the deterioration of effective city government, personnel management, and city finances.
You can’t help but ponder what shenanigans the Gillmor mafia is going to come up with through this Charter Review Committee. In the past, it was to push for two districts, not to appoint a police chief and city clerk, and anything that was common sense they were against—or for—depending on which way the political wind was blowing.
The city council stupidly, and I repeat, stupidly and gullibly allowed this committee to be larger than it should have been. The council was tricked into committing to expanding the committee by the magic tricks of Mayor Gillmor. Councilmembers Jain, Chahal, and Hardy were stupid and should have known better—this is how Gillmor stacks the deck in her favor. Shame on Jain, Chahal, and Hardy. Committees of the past, from 2020 and 2024, had a limited number of members, yet this time Gillmor wanted it expanded. There is a reason for that—she has a plan in mind, and the council blindly agreed to it. Whenever Gillmor is outnumbered in votes on the council, she stacks the deck this way to gain some sort of leverage and power.
She claims that it’s for “more voices and more democracy,” echoing the same language of Councilmember Kevin Park; however, in this case, she is weaponizing it. Gillmor knows who applies and encourages others to apply en masse, because that way the odds are better of getting her plants picked. It is like throwing pasta at the wall and seeing what will stick. In this case, Gillmor got her way—and what she wanted—because now the majority is there that she needed. With former Chief Pat Nikolai, former disgraced Commissioner Burt Field, current Civil Grand Juror Lauren Diamond, and a few more loyalists, the committee is set to follow through with Gillmor’s agenda.
Now that we’ve seen in real time how Gillmor does it—stacks the deck and rigs the game—we can see from a 30,000-foot level the entire scheme she operates. In the summers of 2021, 2022, and 2023, Mayor Gillmor and then-Councilmember Watanabe were posting and advertising on their social media encouraging people to apply to the Civil Grand Jury. This, like the commissions and committees, was their signal for their plants to apply in droves so at least enough would get through. Gillmor knows this process because she herself was appointed by the presiding judge to the 1990–91 grand jury term.
From 2016 to today, Gillmor has had an influence on the Civil Grand Jury. In 2016, Gil Zamora was foreperson of the Civil Grand Jury that released the report on Levi’s Stadium before the 2016 elections—and had worked for the Tino Silva campaign, someone Gillmor supported. That same 2016 grand jury had a member, Karen Michael, who in 2022 would wind up on the grand jury again—this time to release the election-timed report “Unsportsmanlike Conduct.” This same grand jury report referenced the 2016 report where Karen Michael had served.
This Karen Michael was the only carry-over from the 2016 jury to the 2022 grand jury. On the 2022 grand jury, you had members like former District Attorney Karyn Sinunu-Towery, who happened to work in the same office as then-District Attorney Javier Alcala, who would later be the judge in the Becker trial, in which Becker was accused of leaking the grand jury report and lying about it. On that same grand jury, you had former attorney and Mayor of Los Gatos Barbara Spector—where Gillmor’s father, Gary, and Becker case prosecutor District Attorney Jason Malinsky live.
You had Paul Raineri, who had put up Teresa O’Neill yard signs in the 2020 and 2024 elections and had influence on a grand jury that wrote negatively about O’Neill’s opponent, current Councilmember Kevin Park. You then have Shirley Modric, who lives across the street from Teresa O’Neill, goes to St. Justin’s Church with Teresa and disgraced former City Attorney Brian Doyle, and lives within walking distance of Mayor Gillmor’s home. You also have Karen Enzensperger, who was a witness in the Becker trial and was not allowed to answer any questions about communications with Lisa Gillmor or any of Gillmor’s associates.
The 2022 Civil Grand Jurors—Karen Enzensperger, Shirley Modric, Marshall Burak, and David Mariani—were carried over into the 2023–2024 Civil Grand Jury, where newest member Bob O’Keefe was appointed. This is the same Bob O’Keefe who lost to Councilmember Suds Jain in the 2020 election, and the same Bob O’Keefe who won the 2024 City Clerk race after serving on the grand jury. The same Bob O’Keefe was—and is—supported by Mayor Gillmor, and the city clerk is the first to get incoming future grand jury reports. How convenient.
Also on that 2024 grand jury you had members like Joanne Polverino, who was placed by Gillmor loyalist Debbie Tryforos at the table of a councilmember on purpose to spy on them—only to release a grand jury report, “Irreconcilable Differences,” a week later. There is also Lauren Diamond on that same jury, who had a David Kertes sign in her yard in the 2024 election, shortly after the grand jury she was part of released the “Irreconcilable Differences” and “Outplayed” reports.
I am not saying that all Civil Grand Jurors or committee members are plants or rigged. What I am saying is that they put enough plants on a committee or civil grand jury to sway the opinions of those who are not plants—the “go with the flow” types. This is evident in Pat Nikolai being appointed chair of the committee, where you had members like disgraced former Commissioner Burt Field use some looney baseball reference, as well as other members aligned with Gillmor, including Civil Grand Juror Lauren Diamond. They made it look authentic and gave the narrative of, “Who wouldn’t appoint a former police chief as chair of this committee—as a leader?”
Seeing how the Gillmor mafia operates—from commission and committee stacking to civil grand juries—it is clear there is a motive in this charter review far beyond changing outdated language. As another commenter mentioned, the ad hocs are exempt from the Brown Act and Public Records Act, which creates opportunities for corruption and hidden conversations. These specific ad hocs have members like Nikolai and Field, who will do Mayor Gillmor’s bidding the hardest.
There is so much that could be done. For example, they may aim to take down the Silicon Valley Voice/Santa Clara Weekly by possibly removing them as the sole source of Section 815 of the City Charter and making Gillmor’s blogger the new news source of the city and paper of record. Gillmor is playing the long game here by using time to her advantage—she is calculated. She knows the Weekly’s Miles Barber is getting older, and those who run the Weekly are at retirement age. Gillmor is hoping that time and age will make the Weekly obsolete. Could this be her time to strike with a Charter Review Committee stacked in her favor?
Again, Gillmor is calculated, and the truly vindictive are patient as saints. Look at what she started to do to the Chamber of Commerce in 1993 and finished in 2018. She is calculating the Weekly’s shelf life, and this move with the Charter Review could be a sign that she is dismantling everyone around The Weekly. Or could it be that they try to make the mayor a “strong mayor” role—abandoning the manager-council government—giving a possible future Mayor Watanabe big powers? They could make it look like something positive, and knowing Chair Nikolai is involved, the POA would tag along in support.
It reminds me of when Cindy Chavez looked to be the future Mayor of San Jose, and a supposed grassroots organization wanted to change when the mayoral elections happened—from gubernatorial years to presidential years—which would have given Chavez the chance to be the longest-serving mayor. The measure passed, and the mayoral election was moved to presidential years. However, it backfired for Chavez when she lost to Matt Mahan in the race for mayor.
So there are a lot of questions as to what the motives of the Gillmor mafia are on this charter review. But it is clear, from grand jury reports in multiple years to phony press conferences with fake nonprofits like Stand Up For Santa Clara, and how easily it is for Gillmor to stay clear of any accountability, that there is definitely a motive for her to have the majority on this committee.
Might I add, that I have seen this advertising about the Mayor’s breakfast going around hosted by the Chamber of Commerce that Gillmor dismantled and rebuilt. On this flyer you have the Mayor’s that Gillmor is possibly aligned with and there is some history. Like Mountain View Mayor Ellen Kamei is daughter of San Jose Councilmember Rosemary Kamei who happened to serve on the 1991-1992 Civil Grand Jury with Lisa Gillmor before Lisa resigned early in the term and before her 1992 City Council Race. There is Mayor Larry Klein of Sunnyvale who is said to be close to Gillmor while saying he does not like working with her and a coincidence that possibly a different Larry Klein a Palo Alto Councilmember in 1987 was interviewed that went after the Santa Clara city council in a report on ethics, that was same Grand Jury that interviewed then Chair of Parks and Recreation Commission Lisa Gillmor. The other Mayors aligned with Gillmor are Carmen Montano of Milpitas who voted to hire disgraced Santa Clara City Manager Deanna Santana as Interim City Manager of Milpitas who now quit, and lastly Liang Chao of Cupertino who is despised in Cupertino as much as Gillmor is in Santa Clara. The event is also helped put on by The Silicon Valley Business Journal which has often praised Gillmor and been on Gillmor’s side. So this is another great example how Gillmor is stacking the deck with loyalists or those who are not critical of her. Was Matt Mahan of San Jose not available or is he not aligned with Gillmor since the 2022 Mayor elections in Santa Clara and San Jose? At this same event they are talking about the big games the Super Bowl and World Cup where Gillmor can act like she is the savior and take all credit of the events while on the other hand vilifying the events at council meetings.
Impressive points, Roger. Keep them coming.
I hope the council members are paying attention to these discussions, and that some of the supporters begin to notice the patterns of influence at work. It is concerning how easily people can be swayed
Well, the conspiracy theorists are at it again. The plant from the 49ers and Fake Roger. Do you guys stay up late at night texting each other with your fantasies? If nothing else, it’s good humor to read. Pat Nikolai is not the Chief any longer, he’s simply a resident of Santa Clara so your attempt to discredit him falls short and has no relevance on this topic. And “disgraced former commissioner Fields”? get real, he was screwed over by the 49er 5 for ZERO reasons other than he voiced his opinion as a resident of Santa Clara, something everyone should be allowed to do. We even put up with “CSC” and “Fake Roger” because in this country they have the right of free speech, even if they are fake. Correct me if I’m wrong but each council member appointed one member and the rest were appointed by an open draw process that was live streamed and conducted by the City Clerk. Your whining that the deck is stacked is just plain stupid. This is nothing more than an attempt to paint a narrative that you want. I find it even more humorous that Michelle Ryan would complain, she can’t even keep her own house in order at the school board.
Now a response like that sounds awfully a lot like David Kertes? One concerning thing in your response is your opposition to free speech by putting up with it? It’s a little bit alarming there. As for who “CSC” is, CSC has had many valid points in many of their comments however they have commented on the Mayor’s blog and many, like you “An Actual Santa Clara Voter” believe its Josh Stephens from the 49ers, which I somewhat concur. The 49ers were ‘outplayed’ by Gillmor continuously and stupidly allowed Gillmor to push her narratives by themselves stepping into scenarios that got them scrutinized. Gillmor is an opportunist in finding any flaw or issue to blow it up into something larger than it is, or she just simply lies.
As for disgraced commissioner Burt Field who was not appointed because of the lack of votes was not screwed over. This came after his threats to elected officials Councilmembers Suds Jain, Raj Chahal, Kevin Park and Karen Hardy. Who would support someone with that kind of behavior to represent the city?
In fact, School Board Member Michele Ryan would make a great Councilmember when Suds Jain is termed out, someone far better than the angry David Kertes.
As for the charter review, again, maybe I can make it simpler. Nikolai is a plant and uses his past police chief experience to be the chair of the committee and steer it while Mayor Gillmor more than likely is whispering in his ear. At the same time there is a full majority of Gillmor support there that I listed already that can sway or intimidate the rest of the committee. It is not whining when it is obvious how Gillmor operates. Again the City Council stupidly and blindly agreed to expand the size of the committee far beyond what it needed to be. Yes, each member got a pick to the committee. Yet, each member that is selected by the so-called “49er 5” Gillmor sees that as an issue. Gillmor remembers the 2023 Charter Review which was often voted 5-2 like it was on the City Council where Gillmor was in the minority. To fix this issue Gillmor figured the more people on the committee the better the results will be for her agenda. With the addition of the lottery for the other seats all it took was many of her mafia to apply. Makes sense right?
Let’s look to history for guidance where the number of members has fluctuated based on what results are wanted.
2023 Charter Review Committee was tasked with deciding if the Chief of Police and City Clerk should be appointed rather than elected. The committee had 7 members each selected by a Councilmember. The committee was made up of then Councilmember Watanabe selection Satish Chandra , Councilmember Chahal selection Chiragkumar Patel , Councilmember Hardy selection of Christine Kolterman again, Councilmember Park selection Daniel Huynh, Councilmember Suds Jain selection Jeff Houston, Councilmember Becker selection of Clysta Seney and lastly Mayor Gillmor’s At-Large selection of Joyce Davis. The minority in this committee, Chandra and Davis, tried and failed in suing the city over the ballot language that they opposed. However the Measure to change elected chief and clerk was heavily defeated by the Gillmor Machine and Santa Clara POA. https://www.santaclaraca.gov/our-city/government/city-committees/2023-charter-review-committee
The 2019 Charter Review was put together to address the district elections after a judge ruled the city be put into 6 council districts. This Charter Review recommended 2 City Council districts with 3 members each in an effort to protect Gillmor’s majority and agenda. The members were stacked with Gillmor loyalists. Then Councilmember Kathy Watanabe selected Benjamin Cooley, Raj Chahal surprisingly selected Steve Silva a Gillmor loyalist, Councilmember Karen Hardy selected Christine Koltermann, former Councilmember Teresa O’Neill selected Katherine Almazol, former Councilmember Patty Mahan selected current Councilmember Suds Jain, former Councilmember Debi Davis selected Stephen Ricossa, and Mayor Gillmor selected loyalist Richard Bonitio. The vote was 5-2 often with Gillmor’s agenda majority prevailing. That deck was surely stacked in favor. The charter review recommendation which council adopted failed at the ballot box with voters rejecting the 2 district proposal seeing through Gillmor’s power plays.
https://www.santaclaraca.gov/our-city/government/city-committees/2019-charter-review-committee
The 2017 Charter Review Committee was picked by a Gillmor majority. Each councilmember got a pick but there was more. This body was to come up with the future Measure A that failed in 2018 where they tried to make smaller council districts to protect Gillmor’s majority and hopefully be a remedy to the CVRA lawsuit at the time. The Committee was composed of Tino Silva-the chair was selected by Mayor Gillmor, Keith Stattenfield was Vice Chair and selected by former Councilmember Teresa O’Neill, Hazel Alabado was picked by former Councilmember Kathy Watanabe, Markus Bracamonte was picked by then Councilmember Patty Mahan, grifter con artist of the chamber of commerce Chris Horton was selected by Dominic Caserta, Beverly Silva wife of fire union Steve Silva was selected by then Councilmember Debi Davis, former Police Chief Steve Lodge was selected by then Councilmember Pat Kolstad. Right there the Council dynamics at the time in 2017 was 4-3 with Gillmor majority (Gillmor, Watanabe, Davis, O’Neill) always prevailing. The 7 Councilmember selected committee members were to include 2 at-large members selected by the City Council. However at the 11th hour the 2 open seats were expanded for more, and appointed future City Clerk and Gillmor ally Hosam Haggag, Jodi Muirhead, Saskia Feain, Teresa Sulcer, Mary Hanna-Weir and Rex McIntosh who quit. Of all those names I can guarantee at least 4 of 6 were Gillmor votes that I know of. That was 6 additional members to the already 7 for a total of 13 just like 2025. That committee’s recommendation, Elect City Council Members by two districts (e.g. District A and B) with three Council Members representing each district; Elect the three Council Members at the same time per district alternating/staggering between gubernatorial and presidential election years; Utilize Ranked Choice Voting by means of Single Transferrable Vote as soon as the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters Office can support such a system; continue with the City’s current voting method until the County can support the new voting method. https://www.santaclaraca.gov/our-city/government/city-committees/2017-charter-review-committee-district-elections
The 2016 Charter Review Committee was put together for Measure R to protect open space after the Gillmor-49ers feud over the soccer fields. This Charter Review is also the one that put together term limits that were grandfather claused again protecting Gillmor and the old guard. This committee had of course the usual names, most Gillmor aligned standouts. Beverly Silva- Chair, Steve Lodge-Vice Chair, Mario Bouza, Robin Burdick, Saskia Feain, Brian Lowery, Hosam Haggag, Jeannie Mahan, Jodi Muirhead, Howard Myers, Stephen Ricossa, Joe Sweeney, Tino Silva, Mary Elizabeth Hanna-Weir, Noelani Sallings. Can you spot the Gillmor plants? https://www.santaclaraca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/42180/636041996066330000
The 2011 Charter Review had 16 members to discuss how Councilmembers are elected when there were warnings of a CVRA lawsuit. Committee members were Dave DeLozier as Chair, Teresa O’Neill as Vice Chair, Gary Alver, Yuki Ikezi, Mohammed Nadeem, Mike O’Halloran, Vilma Pallette, Steve Silva, Ralph Sivilla, Keith Stattenfield, Dominic Caserta ally Eric Stoker, Sameena Usman, Peter Yoon, Gillmor loyalist and henchmen James Rowen and lastly Future Councilmembers Raj Chahal and Karen Hardy. Again lots of recognizable names that had Gillmor influence. During this Charter Review “Ethics Expert” Dr. Tom Shanks was at the time a consultant on At-Large Elections by seat. Amazing aint it?
https://www.svvoice.com/charter-review-committee-extends-deliberations-through-october/
2009 Had a charter review committee with the purpose of the to determine if existing City Charter language requiring competitive bidding for Public Works projects can be modified to allow for some focused,limited use of a design/build process not subject to competitive bidding in some or all of the construction of an NFL stadium. The committee was composed of 16 members, each Council Member to select one individual (7), one member to be appointed by the Citizen’s Advisory Committee, one member to be appointed by the Chamber of Commerce, and seven at-large members to be selected by City Council through an application/interview process. The selected members were Aldyth Parle, Dan MacNaughton, Dick Wentz, Don Callejon, Don Von Raesfeld,Fred Raia, George Neto; James E. Lee, John Haggerty, Kathleen Lockwood, Larry Marsalli, Lisa Gillmor, Pat Kolstad, Raymond G. Gamma, Steve Chan. Again, all recognizable names. https://www.santaclaraca.gov/our-city/santa-clara-stadium-authority/charter-review-committee-stadium
The 1971 Charter Review Committee was appointed differently than other committees. Instead of having one committee member appointed by each Council Member and seven appointed by the Council as a whole, each Council Member in 1971 made two appointments. The members of that committee were legend Austen Warburten, Michael Ardanz, Marcella Commanda, John Conway, Roger Cuadra, Wade Brummal of the Wade Brummal fund, Maurice Dullea, Frank Guerra, Nick Livak, Foster Lopes, and Ross Trigg. The 1971 committee considered several major issues: making the police chief and city clerk appointive rather than elective and establishing minimum qualifications for both; requiring city employees to live within city boundaries; placing the library board in an advisory rather than directing role, aligning it with other city committees; moving to district elections for City Council Members and eliminating two-consecutive-term limits; putting the city manager form of government to a referendum; and increasing the mayor’s salary to $30,000 per year while prohibiting outside business interests. Those who opposed appointing the police chief and city clerk included individuals who were suspicious of the motives of then-mayor Gary Gillmor, who favored the change. Yes you heard that right Gary Gillmor the Mayor then wanted to change the roles of chief and clerk to appointed from elected. While his daughter years later wanted to keep it Elected. Strange right ? https://www.svvoice.com/40-years-later-santa-clara-discussing-same-governance-questions/
Over the years, many residents or observers would say that Gillmor has consistently exerted influence—subtle or otherwise—over the Charter Review Committees. To pretend she has no sway over the current committee, or that she played no role in previous ones is ignorance. To ignore a long and well-documented political history in this city, Santa Clara’s political circles are notoriously insular, and to many observers it often feels as though the Gillmor network always has a stake in whatever decisions are being made. Whether one views that as strategic leadership or political overreach, it’s impossible to deny that the pattern has shaped the city’s governance for decades.
Hello Rodger (Suds, George, Donald, Byron, Jeff or whomever you may be). Unlike you, I am not scared to use my actual name. When I reply to Nextdoor, Facebook. SVV, Santa Clara new online, etc…I use my name – David Kertes. You sound like a scared keyboard warrior hiding behind a fake name. You seem to always type your mind, would be great to actually see and hear you speak. If all your points are valid, you should step out from behind the keyboard and run for office. Why not just post your real name? You talk a big game, but cannot step out behind your curtain. I have even asked to meet with you for coffee or a beer and you never replied. I will be at the Farmers Market this Saturday kicking off the Suds Recall. Stop on by and we can chat. Would be great to put a face to a fake name.
Well Fake Roger, your wrong on you’re assumption on who it is. But I clearly hit a nerve again with you. You go on your lengthy diatribes whenever your buttons get pushed. Usually with the same drivel about your conspiracy theories about the “Gillmor mafia”. Clearly the Mayor lives rent free in your head (much like she lives rent free in Suds Jain’s head) See a pattern?
Let me refresh your memory on the Burt Field issue. The only threat was a the threat of a recall of Becker, Park and Jain. When asked about the recall moving forward (which it did not) he said that there was a lot of work to do and he would not just go forward without doing his due diligence. He used a common analogy of “ready, fire, aim” as a comment of moving forward without being prepared. Becker took this as a “threat” and contacted the SCPD. The PD saw it for what it was and did not go anywhere with it. So you can continue to perpetuate your narrative of the threats but your comments are a baseless. In response the 49er Five booted Burt from the commission in retaliation. Those of us with common sense saw there actions for exactly what they were.
It seems to me that having a few more “at large” members on the Charter review commission is a good thing as it would force more of a consensus then one persons agenda being pushed through.
Why is it that you only respond to articles on SVV? Is it due to your cozy relationship with the “reporter” and “publisher”?
I would think that Santa Clara News online would be attractive to your delusional responses. But maybe you are posting there. Just under another fake name.
See ya soon Roger (well maybe not because you don’t exist)