By Robert Haugh
San Jose Spotlight published a story on November 12 suggesting that Santa Clara Mayor Lisa Gillmor should not be in office because she violated a term limit rule.
Gillmor was re-elected to serve a second term as Mayor in 2022.
In November 2016, Santa Clara voters passed a term-limit law that applied to anyone who was elected after that date, not before. That’s typical of most laws passed by voters.
But according to Spotlight writer B. Sakura Cannestra, “new questions are swirling about whether Gillmor was eligible to run for reelection in 2022.”
Cannestra only cites Gillmor’s Council opponents and 49er Five members Raj Chahal and Karen Hardy in her story as raising the question.
Neither Chahal nor Hardy are lawyers and admit in the story that they really don’t know the issue. They also both voted to certify Gillmor’s election.
Cannestra also cites Rich Robinson, “a lawyer and political consultant” as raising the issue.
But the story does not disclose that Robinson was employed by the team to work on the notorious dark-money group BluPac. The organization was set up by the 49ers to try and elect pro-team Councilmembers in 2016. They were also fined by the City and investigated by the FPPC.
Robinson is also known for being a long-time Gillmor critic who rarely practices law.
Cannestra did not consult former City Attorney Brian Doyle who was Santa Clara’s City Attorney from 2017 to 2021, according to him.
“Mr. Robinson’s suggestions that the Mayor’s election was somehow illegitimate and her votes could somehow now be discounted are farfetched and do not appear to have any legal support,” said Doyle in an email.
“In any event, I am unaware of any precedent for attacking the legitimacy of the Mayor’s election two years after her (re)election.”
Cannestra’s story also drew a rebuke from Dr. Tom Shanks, the ethicist who set up Santa Clara’s award-winning ethics programs decades ago. Shanks is conducting a study on the corruption in Santa Clara that includes a review of the role of local media.
“The reporter did not consult relevant experts, such as then-acting City Clerk Jennifer Yamaguma, who certified the mayor’s eligibility in 2018 with professional diligence,” wrote Shanks.
“Both City Clerks and the City Council certified eligibility and election results in 2018 and 2022. Even Spotlight previously referred to the 2018 election as the mayor’s “first term.” Why is this a story now?”
Shanks also expressed serious concerns about Cannestra’s use of Robinson as a source.
“Spotlight’s use of Rich Robinson, a 49ers consultant, without transparency on his affiliations, is biased and violates journalistic standards for honest reporting,” said Shanks. “This is a disturbing pattern for San Joe Spotlight reporters and editors.”
Shanks said that his study raises larger questions about the publication.
“Legal records from the Anthony Becker case indicate the 49ers viewed Spotlight as a resource for promoting their narratives,” said Shanks.
“My research shows a similar pattern of pro-49ers media influence that shows how San Jose Spotlight has a history of regularly attacking people who question the team, like Lisa Gillmor, using dubious facts.”
Shanks’s research indicates that San Jose Spotlight Publisher Ramona Giwargis is the driving force behind the 49ers stories in her publication.
Giwargis has been named as one of the 49ers’ favorite go-to reporters to spin their stories and attack the team’s opponents.
Giwargis has been named as a journalist the 49ers could count on to advance their agenda. She is mentioned by multiple team sources in depositions, court documents, Becker trial testimony, and San Francisco Chronicle stories.
“Their publisher (Giwargis) has a long-time cozy relationship with the 49ers that unfortunately is coming out through the publication’s reporting,” said Shanks.
“It’s something that the Spotlight board needs to address if they take their responsibilities seriously to serve the public trust and if they want to comply with the standards set forth by the Institute for Nonprofit News.”
Suds Jain
Follows Donald Trump
Check out Sen Elzabeth Warren recent charge
DONALD TRUMP REFUSES TO SIGN ETHICS PLEDGE.FOR PRESIDEBTIAL TRANSITION.
Suds voted to certify LG election in 2022
Your TDS is showing… don’t compare our glorious President to be to Suds…
Wow, this reeks of desperation! Pathetic!
First, your grammar and punctuation is atrocious-totally embarrassing for a Councilmember .
Second, you try to dig at Robert by saying his paper suffers from low readership WHEN YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY READING IT! Oh I guess it was for the articles? LOL!
Your comments about Tom Shanks make one wonder why you would be against ethics? Bring up your own proposals if you don’t like what’s out there!
Suds, maybe when you are on the witness stand at your buddy Beckers trial you will be able to use some dubious facts to hide the real fact that you knew a crime was committed and chose to hide that info until you had to testify before the grand jury. Way to uphold the oath you took.
You keep complaining about not being able to sign the ethics pledge, but let’s face it, you never would have anyway because your ethics are non existent.
You and your buddy KP may have pulled the wool over some voters eyes but we will all be closely watching you over the next 4 years and holding you accountable as you have never experienced before.
Wow, can we trust Tom Shanks’ “study on the corruption in Santa Clara that includes a review of the role of local media.” to be unbiased? He won’t answer my questions about his self-published ethics pledge which he deceptively called the “Santa Clara Ethics Pledge” that was promoted heavily by Gillmor candidates and POA and Firefighters.
Haugh quotes Shanks’ as saying:
“My research shows a similar pattern of pro-49ers media influence that shows how San Jose Spotlight has a history of regularly attacking people who question the team, like Lisa Gillmor, using dubious facts.”
I wonder if Shank’s will be studying the “Santa Clara NEWS online” as well.
Will he investigate the “pattern” of pro-Gillmor media influence that shows how Santa Clara News Online has a history of regularly attacking people who question Lisa Gillmor, like Suds Jain, Kevin Park and Anthony Becker using dubious facts.
Will Shanks study why Lisa Gillmor has never received a Jabroni because I certainly don’t believe she’s perfect? There’s no more room on my wall for Jabronis I’ve received from Haugh.
Will Shanks investigate how Santa Clara News Online is funded and who the donors are? There seems to be a serious lack of transparency about funding and the number of readers.
A sitting councilman is upset about others being snubbed for a Jabroni award. LMAO!!!
How much SCNA has changed SC politics is actually pretty impressive.
This is funny…
Obviously someone has too much time on their hands.
Suds, take a breath, sit down, relax, you won the election.
Now go back to helping the 49ers take more of our City for their benefit.
Next time you are in court, maybe Becker will give you a hug.
I think you both would just love that special time together.
Good memories for both of you I’m sure.
Just the facts Mam
Suds,
You can attack Robert’s blog as partisan all you want and I agree that it is partisan.
But you cannot defend the partisanship of the Silicon Valley Voice and San Jose Spotlight by attacking this blog or Tom Shanks. Even if Tom Shanks is partisan in not criticizing the Santa Clara News or Lisa Gillmor he is right in calling out the partisanship of the Silicon Valley Voice and San Jose Spotlight.
It is now known fact that high ranking people of both those publications were working behind the scenes with the Forty Niners to help improve their public perception. We know that the Forty Niners were paying the Silicon Valley Voice to run political ads and maybe for other things. We know that Angie Tolliver tried to help Anthony Becker have a conversation with Rahul Chandhok around the time that Chandhok was testifying to the grand jury about Becker. We know that Becker sent the grand jury report to Chandhok and tried to hide it and lied about it. We know that Chandhok sent the report to Ramona Giwargis who may have already gotten it from Becker.
You are a Santa Clara city councilperson and should not be engaging in whataboutist attacks. Not without first acknowledging and trying to do something to fix the problems on your side of the aisle. And not only when you are giving sworn testimony.
You criticize Robert for being one sided but you are also completely one sided. The difference is that he is a freelance blogger and you are a city councilperson. In this at least the people of your district and the whole city deserve better from you.
Suds- I don’t see them talking about SCN at your buddy Becker’s trial, but they are talking about the SV Voice and SanJose spotlight.
Can’t believe we have to deal with you for 4 more years. Have you sent your thank you card to the 9ers?
The author and editor of San Jose Spotlight along with author of this blog post and those quoted (Tom Shanks, Rich Robinson, and Brian Doyle) have not noted two critical pieces of City Charter Section 701…
1. “If a member of the Council serves a partial term in excess of two (2) years, it shall be considered a full term for the purpose of this provision.
2. The office of elected Mayor, to be filled from the City at large, is a separate office from the Council and solely for the purpose of this term limit disqualification, is not a Council office or the Council.
Therefore, I believe Gillmor’s multiple terms since 2016 should be viewed this way…
3. The two-year period of debate is December 1, 2016 to December 17, 2018 which is only applicable to someone appointed to a Council Office, not appointed as Mayor.
4. Gillmor won reelection and was sworn in on December 18, 2018, for a full term through December 12, 2022. https://santaclaranews.org/2018/12/17/welcome-to-city-hall-raj-karen-hosam-and-welcome-back-mayor-gillmor/
5. Gillmor again won reelection and was sworn in December 13, 2022 with that full term running through 2026. https://santaclaranews.org/2022/12/13/swearing-in-ceremony-tonight-for-santa-clara-mayor-lisa-gillmor-councilmembers-raj-chahal-and-karen-hardy/
Hopefully the new City Council won’t waste too much time or valuable resource arguing over a Mayor who will officially term out in just two years.
Well researched Singer folks. Since you’re deep-diving into the City Charter, please post some links for guidance to the new City Council about criminal convictions of a Council Member. Appreciate the help!
CSC,
Thank you for the analysis and citations this makes sense. Everyone on the council should trying to stop with petty efforts to undermine others on the council. Everyone should be trying to be more collegial or even just civil. Watanabe should not have barred Park from speaking at that stop hate against Asians rally. Park should not have used his position on the dais to mock a member of the public. This retrospective attempt to invalidate Gillmor’s legitimacy at mayor should be ended. The personal feuding needs to stop for the good of all Santa Clarans.
Time for questions
2022
Did anyone challenge Gillmor nomination paper?
NO
any hit piece about term limits during campaign?
NO
Any challenge on certifying her election?
No
Nothing
It’s not surprising that stuff like this comes from Spotlight or SVV. They are the National Enquirer of local “reporting”. This was so easily researchable by anyone with half a brain (okay, I guess that’s why the reporter couldn’t find it). I’m sure there is someone at the 49ers with all kinds of stuff they will get these hacks to write about to create diversions from the truth. On top of it, members of our council try to leave the door open when asked for comment when they know the truth. These people continue to be an embarrassment to our city and we have at least 2 more years with a couple of them.
Dana well spoken, but you have to remember that where Al Davis of the Oakland Raiders had the great fun saying, “Just win Baby”.
Jed York most famous saying is “Chaos creates opportunities”.
The 49er have 30 more year to spin the “truth”, back financially
Just keep spinning the truth, keep throwing mud against the wall, something, somewhere is going to stick, somewhere at sometime.
2 horrible examples of “mud sticking to the wall” are Kevin Park, Suds Jain got re-elected.
Yes that’s as bad as it can get for us right now.
Residents who are now aware of this scheming, conniving useless group of individualsand just need to educate other’s.
Understand all they (the 40Whinners) want is everything.
Burt Field
This is baloney. I was on the Charter Review Committee that came up with the proposal for the term limits. Time served on the council does not count towards the mayor’s term limit nor vice versa. Ain’t that complicated.
Sec. 701 Term limits of mayor and council members.
No person elected as member of the Council shall be eligible to serve, or serve, for more than two (2) full terms; but such service prior to December 1, 2016, shall not disqualify any person from further service as a member of the Council. If a member of the Council serves a partial term in excess of two (2) years, it shall be considered a full term for the purpose of this provision. The office of elected Mayor, to be filled from the City at large, is a separate office from the Council and solely for the purpose of this term limit disqualification, is not a Council office or the Council. Consequently, time served in such office of elected Mayor is not time served on the Council and time served on the Council is not time served in such office of elected Mayor. (As amended by electors at election held November 5, 1968, approved by Joint Resolution of the Legislature filed with the Secretary of State January 15, 1969; Amended by electors at an election held March 7, 2000, Charter Chapter 11 of the State Statutes of 2000; Amended by electors at an election held November 8, 2016, Charter Chapter 18 of the State Statutes of 2017)