Consider the issues in Santa Clara. A bloated and busted budget, a divided Council, a City Attorney run rampant, a Mayor whose power is low on wattage and a City Manager whose salary and payroll defies gravity.
Is there hope on the horizon?
Maybe, maybe not.
Mayor Gillmor is a skilled manipulator of people, projects and problems. Her record has left a twisted trail of tragic tactics. Within months of taking office, Gillmor reshaped the core of the Council, eliminated power packed employees with a punch and rapidly replaced them.
As staff writer Carolyn Schuk points out in her recent online article, the hiring of City Attorney Brian Doyle was a fluke. Doyle has proved his worth by going from fluke to flake.
Just imagine. This legal beagle of the City has cost residents of Santa Clara millions with his ego-centered decision to withhold a settlement letter on the CVRA lawsuit. A lawsuit that the old Council and Mayor Gillmor were warned about and which she and they ignored three separate times.
Gillmor has ignored Doyle’s boondoggles because, like a faithful lapdog, he defends the Mayor and her actions. Or, in the case of the CVRA lawsuit, her inaction. Blind support is a poor substitute for sound, sensible and serious strategy.
In addition, Doyle publicly comments as City Attorney then magically transforms himself into the role of a citizen by stepping down from the dais to speak his own opinion. This schizophrenic-like behavior does not portray the absence of bias from a City-paid employee.
Doyle’s duty has been to detect, direct and disseminate! Not dodge, deflect and delay. His counsel has become corrupted with his covert and clandestine clam-like character and by his exclusion of time-sensitive and money-saving information from the Council.
For this alone he should be terminated. His employment contract is only as good as his performance, which has crossed the line and gone out of bounds. He has violated the intent of his contract and should be ousted. In addition, he is not paid to inject his personal opinions during Council discussions.
Taking immediate action may not sit well with the Mayor. Yet it would be a powerful and professional upward step for City employees, Council Members and Santa Clara residents.
View Comments (1)
Well, it's 3/14 and he's still here. We'll have to see what happens at the next Council meeting. It does seem the trial judge thought there were novel issues presented which suggests a basis in law for going to trial. It also may be the Santa Monica case has a bearing on our case given how the CA Sup. Ct. has said the issue to hear is on minority percentages. However, it's absolutely unethical to not communicate a valid settlement offer to one's client.