rhaugh2154

Santa Clara Primary Elections: The Real Winners and Losers

By Robert Haugh

Santa Clara voters overwhelmingly voted against attempts to take away their right to elect the City Clerk (Measure A) and Police Chief (Measure B).

Here’s the latest update from the County Registrar yesterday.  No on Measure A is still at 67 percent.  And No on Measure B is still at 72 percent.

Now, here are the real winners and losers.

Winners

  • The Santa Clara Police Officers Association – they organized the No on Measure B campaign. There were nice ads on a billboard near Costco, good direct mail, and well-done Facebook ads.  And they didn’t use any dead police chiefs in their campaign. (See Karen Hardy).
  • Police Chief Pat Nikolai – in some ways, he was on the ballot. Because he’s a popular and respected Police Chief, the voters felt good about rejecting Measure B. He also came up with the campaign slogan:  “Don’t B Fooled.”  The slogan worked.
  • Mayor Lisa Gillmor – she was visible in the efforts to defeat both measures. She was the most prominent signer in the ballot arguments and Santa Clara voters trust her when it comes to the direction of the City.
  • Councilmember Kathy Watanabe – she was also a visible opponent of both measures. She has the most influence in the Northside. These measures show that she can be an effective advocate in the rest of the City, too.
  • Assembly Candidate Patrick Ahrens – He opposed Measure B when his opponent tried to play both sides. He finished first in the primary with a 10-point lead. He’ll be heavily favored to win in November and go to Sacramento.
  • Santa Clara Residents – last but not least, this was good for the City. It prevented the 49er Five from completely controlling the Police Department and giving the 49ers even more favors that cost Santa Clara taxpayers money.

Losers

  • The 49er Five (minus Kevin Park)– they came up with the idea. They created a Charter Review Committee. They forced City staff to write a deceptive ballot question. They lost big on both measures. And it cost Santa Clara taxpayers approximately $500,000. If only someone had conducted a poll and told them it was a dumb idea and a waste of money.  
  • Charter Review Committee Chair Jeff Houston – questions were raised about how he coordinated the Committee’s activities with Councilmember Suds Jain, an ethical violation. The Committee also used manipulated data to justify putting the measures on the ballot.
  • City staff – During this process, questions were raised about Staff’s ethics and integrity.  This happened during the Charter Review Committee process and the manipulation of data. And City Attorney Glen Googins would not take responsibility for writing what some Committee members said was deceptive ballot language. That’s something the Civil Grand Jury warned about in a 2022 report. They may need to update their report.
  • The 49ers – Okay, they didn’t spend any money in the campaign to support either measure. But the team is guilty by association. They elected the 49er Five with multi-million dollar independent expenditures. They own them. So, it makes the team look bad when the 49er Five do dumb political stuff like Measure A and B. Not as bad as when someone lies to a Grand Jury. But it’s still bad.
  • Assembly Candidate Tara Sreekrishnan – She wouldn’t give a straight answer about Measure B which cost her votes. She’s in a virtual tie for second place (10 points behind Ahrens) and may not make the runoff.

14 comments

  1. Robert,

    There is no reason to levy criticism against city attorney Glen Googins about this. He did not use “deceptive” language.

    He used neutral and simple language that did not try to influence voters either way. The ballot language did not state that the current method of selecting a chief is by voting and has been since 1971. But it also did not state that Santa Clara is the only city in the entire state of California that still has elections for police chief.

    I do not understand why you would try to bring negative focus upon Googins about this. I do not think it is appropriate and I think it is counterproductive to stir up political animosity toward Googins about this.

    Reply

    • I sense you and electronically give you a big hug (with consent of course).

      You complain without stating facts.

      “deceptive” language….What language? Conclusions without cogent argument, well, never mind.

      You again state: “He used neutral and simple language…” What is neutral and what is simple?.

      Please reply. Seriously.

      Reply

  2. The charter review committee is a joke. A bunch of progressive types trying to continue the unbridled urbanization of Santa Clara. Most of us do not value your input. I don’t know why Santa Clara continues to ask for their input.

    Reply

  3. Suds, please move from Santa Clara. You obviously aren’t happy here. You want to change things so they fit your expectations of how life should be. What you don’t realize is that diversity of opinions is good. Not everyone is the same or wants the same thing. You need to be flexible. I honestly feel sorry for you. You have a big chip on your shoulder and are going to give yourself a heart attack if you don’t understand that life isn’t just about you and your happiness.

    Reply

    • We have neglected to shed light on Byron Fleck’s role. Fleck directed many of wacky antics of this campaign including the dead people quotes. Each reader of these posts needs to pledge to do what they can to make Santa Clara’s campaigns fair and ethical.

      Reply

  4. Winner – Santa Clara News and journalist Robert Haugh

    Losers – The San Jose Mercury and “Silicon Valley Voice” (vomit) that printed opinion pieces under the guise of journalism ripping the City of Santa Clara for having an elected police chief, and as of now have not printed a word about the election results which left them with egg on their faces and looking very dumb.

    Burt, many in my neighborhood would love to see you run for city council. I hope you consider, you are the epitome of the spirit of Santa Clara.

    Suds, you are the antithesis of the spirit of Santa Clara. You are also on the BART Board of Directors which by any measure is a huge financial failure. What do you care though? You personally are responsible imo for throwing over half a million dollars down the drain on an election that was doomed for failure and had absolutely no mandate. The amount of wasted staff time is criminal. You spend all your time on the 49ers when the rest of the city is falling apart. You and the other 49er 5 have done at best, and generously, a horrible job. At worst, well, that is too long a list. Your testimony at Becker’s trial will be so interesting.

    Suds, still think Santa Clara News and its readers are not relevant?

    Reply

  5. Time for action

    Without 49er money
    Jain is a loser

    Santa Clara voters:

    Seek help

    Either Burt Field or Mayor Gillmor

    Form a political committee

    SANTA CLARANS FOR FAIR AND ETHICAL ELECTIONS
    FAIRNESS

    + SUPPORT CANDIDATES THAT WILL FORM. ETHICS COMMISSION
    +DISAVOW ANY GROUP THAT WILL SPEND MORE THAN 30K

    +RATE CANDIDATES ON FAIRNESS

    POST SIGNS AND DOOR HANGERS.
    FAIRNESS SLATE

    Reply

  7. Dear Community,

    Let’s make a Political comparison…

    Past San Jose District 5 Elected Representative Magdalena Carrasco and the 49er “FOR SALE GROUP”.

    After the terrible job Carrasvo did in the East Valley, looking past the Community needs infavor of her friends and her future in seeking Higher Office

    – County Board of Education
    – Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, District 2

    I feel that the 49er Group is NEVER GOING TO BE ELECTED TO ANOTHER TERM OR ANOTHER OFFICE.

    The similarities are to closely related.

    The negative actions in the East Valley that actually worked against the Community is a very clear mirrored representation of Santa Clara.

    I am glad that your Families have moved to correctthe negative impacts created by 49ers and their “For Sale”.

    At least they did not tell the Mercury News that “Your 80 year old mother was stalking them at their home” as Carrasco did about my Mother, when I ran against her.

    She is a bit lower then the the Group.

    The truth is we did not run the negative campaign. That is not our nature.

    We never published Puctures, Emails, or News articles.

    I lost. It was democratic and I accepted it.

    In Community Spirt,
    Danny Garza

    Reply

  8. “During this process, questions were raised about Staff’s ethics and integrity.”
    Which is exactly why it is not a good idea for this council majority to make any more appointments of significance.

    Reply

    • One fact proves Mr Haugh is a winner as well.

      Measure A lost.

      No.money was spent opposing it.

      It is true.

      I refuse to deny facts. Regardless of my view towards Mr Haugh; the fact is this key fact is there.

      Mr Jain is a fool.

      The entire matter was a waste of time. Since 2020, Jain has demonstrated his complete political idiocy. Both Jain and Becker have increased Haugh’s influence over ten times. Park is also a fool.

      The most obvious way to check the POA would be to accept Vartan’s ethics commission proposal.

      Measure A and B were poorly done. Houston owes the city an apology. The record of 2020 to 2024 has been a tale of Lovecraftian political horror. Jain’s views along with Becker demonstrate that they are sworn members of a political Cult of Clithu.

      Reply

    • Howard
      Very valid point. So what do we do now? How is our City suppose to operate in a way that will benefit us, the residents?
      it’s sad that sometimes you don’t appreciate what until it’s gone.
      Two great examples are losing Mr. Brian Doyle and Mrs Deanna Santana
      Mr. Doyle was even better than the KC Chiefs against the 49ers. He was 7-0.
      Mrs. Santana actually had the gall to question the 49ers in how they were operating in our City.
      So what do we have now?
      Well here is the good news, and it was just confirmed yesterday.

      Measure A had $0.00 dollars spent to defend it.
      66% of the residents decided if the 49ers want it, then I’m against it.
      Measure B did have maybe a few thousands dollars spent on it… just a small token thrown in the pot compared to the massive and some may say misguided efforts of the 49er’s and their Council Members, Charter Review Committee and City Staff.
      71% of the residents decided if the 49ers want it, then I’m against it.

      Bravo, well done…. stay tuned November is coming. You know the 49ers are not going to go away without a fight.
      The one thing can’t buy is your vote. Love this country, good or bad, it’s still the best country in the world. Again we can agree to disagree on many things, but one I hope we all agree upon is the days of the 49ers running our City is over.
      Let’s get our City Back, and never ever let it go away ever again.

      Can’t wait to hear us talk about the new Central Park’s, Magical Bridge that is being built.
      Then I want to hear about our International Swim Center getting refurbished and the plan that will be put in place to sustain it into the future.

      I am so Happy this morning, I mean really happy. It’s been awhile that I can sit back and reflect on the efforts we have taken to get to this point. Truthfully if the 49ers were not so stupid and petty, they could have taken this town in a second.
      They pissed off the wrong lady when they lied to Lisa Gillmor.

      Thank you all. Yesterday was a huge validation. Our City needed it, and thank you for stepping up to vote.
      We may never meet, but know you now know are never alone in this fight.
      Burt Field
      burt.field@gmail.com

      Reply

Leave a Reply