By Debbie Tryforos
I knew former Santa Clara Councilmember Debi Davis for 10 years. She was my friend.
We also served together in Soroptimist International, working to help young women in our community achieve their dreams. Through that work, I saw Debi’s character firsthand. She cared deeply about Santa Clara, respected the people she worked with and always tried to do things the right way.
That is why I was appalled to hear Councilmember Suds Jain use a public City Council meeting last week to disparage Debi after her death.
Jain claimed that before he joined the Council, Debi “used to go and sit in directors’ offices for hours,” taking up their time, a violation of our City Charter if she was trying to influence their actions.
But Jain also admitted in the same sentence that this was merely something he had heard.
He offered no firsthand knowledge. No evidence. No documentation. Not even the name of the person who supposedly told him.
It was hearsay directed at a woman who is no longer here to defend herself.
Mayor Lisa Gillmor immediately and correctly objected.
“You are giving an example of something that you have no direct information about,” Gillmor told Jain. “She’s passed away and you’re disparaging her name. I really object to that. That’s wrong.”
Former Councilmember Kathy Watanabe, who served with Debi, later called into the meeting to correct the record.
Watanabe explained that Debi always received permission from the City Manager before speaking with department directors or seeking information from City staff. Debi understood the proper process and followed it.
That description is consistent with the Debi Davis I knew.
Debi was conscientious. She respected the City Manager form of government. Suggesting otherwise based only on rumor is unfair and irresponsible.
The decent thing is to raise concerns about people while they are alive and able to answer them, not use the City Council dais to repeat hearsay after they are gone.
There is also more than a little irony in Jain lecturing others about ethics and council conduct.
The Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury has raised serious concerns about Jain’s own conduct. Its 2022 report concluded that his actions and inaction were inconsistent with Jain’s duties to the residents he was elected to serve.
In 2024, the Civil Grand Jury specifically recommended that Jain receive one-on-one conflict-resolution training “to learn to work more effectively for the good of the City.” It also recommended that he participate annually in training with an outside government ethics expert.
Perhaps Jain should reflect on those recommendations before making unsupported accusations about the ethics or conduct of someone who dedicated years of her life to Santa Clara.
Debi Davis deserves better. Her family deserves better. The residents of Santa Clara deserve better from an elected official.
Councilmember Jain should issue a clear and public apology at tonight’s council meeting.
That would not undo what Jain said. But it would be the right thing to do.
Editor’s Note: Debbie Tryforos is a lifelong Santa Claran who has served many different roles in the community.
Restoring Professionalism to Santa Clara
It is long past time for the Santa Clara City Council to start acting like the professional body our community deserves. The constant bickering at the expense of Santa Clara’s residents is exhausting. What kind of example are we setting for future generations?
If elected officials want to meet with city staff to better understand issues and represent their constituents’ voices, they should be able to do so. City staff ultimately serve and are accountable to the citizens of this city. Constructive oversight by elected officials should be expected—just as shareholders expect oversight from a corporate board.
Leadership vs. Rumor-Mongering
It is incredibly tiring to see accusations lobbed from the dais without a shred of proof. Criticizing the past is easy, but true leadership is shown when you focus on making positive changes for the future.
• Unsupported Accusations: Relying on hearsay to disparage a former colleague who is no longer here to defend herself does nothing to move Santa Clara forward.
• A Double Standard: There is a stark contrast between repeating unsubstantiated rumors about others and addressing the documented, official critiques of one’s own conduct.
A History of Grand Jury Scrutiny
Before lecturing the public or throwing stones at the legacy of others, Councilmember Jain should reflect on the serious concerns raised about his own governance in two separate, damning Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury reports:
• The June 2024 Grand Jury Report (“Irreconcilable Differences: Santa Clara City Council”): This report directly investigated the severe dysfunction, intense political infighting, and behavioral issues plaguing our City Council, pointing specifically to Councilmember Jain’s conduct.
• The June 2026 Grand Jury Report (“VTA’s Management and Oversight of BART Silicon Valley Phase II”): This recent report sharply criticized the VTA’s handling of the $12.7 billion BART extension. As a member of both the VTA Board and its BSVII Project Oversight Committee, Councilmember Jain shares responsibility for what the Grand Jury identified as a failure to manage massive financial risks, control ballooning costs, and hold staff accountable.
Working Toward Respect and Accountability
Perhaps if Councilmember Jain spent less time focusing on rumors, he could channel his energy into building a culture of respect on our City Council. Strong leadership requires working collaboratively and respectfully, rather than criticizing past interactions.
Furthermore, on the VTA side, a renewed focus on actual, critical oversight duties—rather than political distractions—is exactly what he was elected to perform to ensure these high-profile transit projects run smoothly and remain accountable to taxpayers.
Instead of looking backward to score cheap political points, our elected officials need to look forward, adhere to the ethical standards demanded by the Grand Jury, and focus on delivering actual results for the citizens of Santa Clara.
Yet… ROD still keeps defending this clown.
I was a very frequent critic of Debi Davis. However. She deserved understanding and love for having tried her best. Debi was there for the residents. She passed away. And Suds’ memory of her is wrong!!! maybe Debi made mistakes, but everyone does. Debi’s heart was in the right place, and I feel better having known her. Debi deserves respect. DISAGREEMENT IS COMMON, but in the final analysis. Debi was a good person. JAIN IS A COWARD. I can sit back and wonder what I could have done different to work with Debi better. I AM SORRY SHE IS GONE, AND I know she is missed.
I was disappointed by Sud’s remarks at the last council meeting. Bringing up a former council member who has passed away and speaking negatively about her struck me as inappropriate and lacking in respect. I believe public officials should focus on constructive dialogue and treat both colleagues and former public servants with dignity, even when there are disagreements. This incident reinforces my concern about his judgment and leadership.
No need to concern yourself, Kathy. He has neither judgement nor leadership.
Making unfounded accusations of misdeeds of a past council member makes me wonder; what has he done now from which he is trying to deflect? But suds does excel in something, he is the worst of the worst.
Sociopathic Suds strikes again. His only values are in his own agenda. Suds does not know how to relate on a human level. He does not reach out to his district and does nothing for it, he feels he knows what’s best, he does not. Suds is a terrible representative and a worse person.
Debi was a far finer person than Mr. Jain. She and those of us who understand how human beings should treat each other do not speak ill of the dead. Apparently Mr. Jain has no such understanding.