1/9/2024 Item 4
Council Meeting
Item #4: Discussion,
Consideration, and Direction
to Staff Regarding Actions to
be Taken in Response to the
IA
Santa Clara County Civil
1852 Grand Jury Report Entitled
THE MISSION CITY "Irreconcilable Differences:
Santa Clara City Council"
July 9, 2024
1 City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
Civil Grand Jury Report
• On June 12, 2024, the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury published a report entitled "Irreconcilable Differences: Santa Clara City Council" which includes various findings and recommendations.
• Penal Code Section 933(c) requires that a governing body of the particular public agency or department that has been the subject of a Civil Grand Jury final report to respond within 90 days on the specified findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body.
• The City's responses on the Civil Grand Jury report findings and recommendations are due by September 10, 2024.
• Individual Councilmembers were also requested to provide their response to 2 certain findings and recommendations by August 12, 2024. 2 POST MEETING MATERIAL
1 /9/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
Council Written Petition
• On June 18, 2024, the City Clerk's Office received a Council Written Petition from Mayor Gillmor and Councilmember Watanabe
requesting an item be placed on a future Council agenda for a public discussion on the Civil Grand Jury report, the findings, and possible Council actions.
• The item was heard at the June 25, 2024 meeting.
• Council unanimously approved the matter to be agendized for the July 9,2024 meeting.
3 City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
City Response Required
• The Civil Grand Jury report included a total of 9 findings and 22 recommendations.
• The City, as an agency, has been directed to respond to 8 of the findings and 9 of the recommendations.
4 4
2 19/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
Findings Requiring City Response
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES: • Finding 1a: The working relationships Santa Clara City Council
among Councilmembers and the Mayor
are broken.
2023-2024 Santa Clara County
Civil Grand Jury
to 12. 39V
5 City of
Santa Clara
the Contero What Poten
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES:
• Finding 1b: Some Councilmembers do
Santa Clara City Council
not adhere to the City's adopted ethical
and behavioral standards while conducting
City business on the dais.
2023-2024 Santa Clara County
Cari Grand lun
6 3
7/9/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES: • Finding 1c: Councilmembers Becker and Santa Cinra City Council
Park air petty grievances and engage in
squabbles with other elected officials and
constituents from the dais.
2023-2024 Santa Clara County
Civil Grand Jury
- 12, 103%
City of
Santa Clara
The Conter of What's Possible
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES: • Finding 2: Councilmembers Becker, Santa Clara City Council
Park, and Chahal do not understand
and/or do not follow established
parliamentary and meeting procedures.
2023-2024 Santa Clara County
Civil Grand Jury
5-12. 3030
8 8
4 7/9/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES. • Finding 3: Some Councilmembers do not Santa Cinra City Council
uphold their responsibility to conduct the
City's business professionally and
efficiently.
2023-2024 Santa Clara County
Civil Grand Jury
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
• Finding 4: Some Councilmembers have
become preoccupied by personal and
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES:
Santa Clara City Council
political vendettas resulting in verbal
attacks, mocking, and disparaging
members of the public and community
volunteers from the dais without
2023.2024 Santa Clara Count
consequence. Councilmembers have
ignored the public's request to address
10 their behaviors.
10 5
7/9/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES: • Finding 6: There has not been an Santa Clara City Council
employee satisfaction survey since 2019.
2023-2024 Sanra Clara County
Civil Grand Jury
11 11
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES: • Finding 7: City staff is exceptionally Santa Clara City Council
professional, well prepared, and
consistently maintains their composure
regardless of behaviors exhibited by the
Council. Staff's behavior is a model for the
2023-2024 Santa Clara County
Civil Grand Jury
Council.
12 12
6 7/9/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
# Additional Findings Requiring Individual Councilmembers' Response 1a* The working relationships among Councilmembers and the Mayor are broken 1b* Some Councilmembers do not adhere to the City's adopted ethical and behavioral standards while conducting City business on the dais.
Councilmembers Becker and Park air petty grievances and engage in squabbles with other elected officials and constituents from the dais.
2* Councilmembers Becker, Park, and Chahal do not understand and/or do not follow established parliamentary and meeting procedures
5 Councilmembers Becker and Park have engaged in unethical behavior on the dais by insulting, humiliating, and intimidating constituents and volunteers. Councilmembers Becker and Hardy explicitly encourage this behavior by laughing, snickering, or eye-rolling. Councilmembers Becker, Park, Hardy, Jain, and Chahal implicitly encourage these behaviors by failing to call out inappropriate conduct.
13 *The City, as an agency, has also been directed to respond to Findings 1a, 1b, 1c, and 2. 13 City of
Santa Clara
The Canter of What's Possible
Legally Required Responses for Findings
• Penal Code Section 933.05(a) requires the responding entity to indicate one of the following for each Civil Grand Jury finding:
1. The respondent agrees with the finding.
2. The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response will specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and will include an explanation of the reasons therefor. 14 14
7/9/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Contero What aca
Recommendations Requiring City Response
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES: • Recommendation 1a: The City should Santa Clara City Council
hire a conflict resolution professional and
adopt robust conflict resolution training
strategies. This recommendation should
2023-2024 Santa Clara County be implemented by October 1, 2024.
Civil Grand Jury
So 12 A30
15 15
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
• Recommendation 1b: Councilmember
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES: Park should attend one-on-one conflict Santa Clara City Council
resolution training so he can learn to
behave in a manner reflective of an elected
official. This recommendation should be
implemented by October 1, 2024.
2023.2074 Santa sta County
Civil Grand Jury
1I MI
16 16
8 7/9/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
• Recommendation гa: Councilmember
Becker should pledge to attend trainings in
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES:
parliamentary procedures so that his
Santa Clnra City Council
behavior is more reflective of an elected
who is dedicated to the electorate. These
recommendations should be implemented
2023-2024 Saura Clara County by October 1, 2024.
Civil Grand Jury
17 17
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
• Recommendation 2b: Councilmember
Park should pledge to attend trainings in
Santa Clara City Council parliamentary procedures so that his behavior is more reflective of an elected
who is dedicated to the electorate. These
recommendations should be implemented
2023-2024 Santa Clara County by October 1, 2024.
Civil Grand Jury
18 18
9 7/9/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
• Recommendation 2c: Councilmember
Chahal should pledge to attend trainings
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES:
Santa CInra City Council in parliamentary procedures, so he can demonstrate a better working knowledge
of the parliamentary process. This
recommendation should be implemented
2023-2024 Santa Clara County
by October 1, 2024.
Civil Grand Jury
Jer 12 200
19 19
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
• Recommendation 3: The City should adopt the formal
resolution for Meeting Management Procedures
developed and presented by staff to the Governance and
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES:
Santa Clara City Council Ethics Committee meeting on December 4, 2023. This resolution would tie meeting procedures to the City Code of Ethics and Values, and Behavioral Standards for
Public Meetings, codify rules regarding respectful and
professional language on the dais, and initiate more
2023-2024 Santa Clara County productive meetings to keep the Council and public Civil Grand Jury
To 12.3030 focused on City business. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024.
20 20
10 7/9/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
• Recommendation 4a: The City should
establish an Independent Ethics
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES.
Santa CInra City Council Commission to oversee the behavior of Councilmembers and to ensure they model
positive engagement with the public and
reclaim the public's trust. This
recommendation should be implemented
Civil Grand Jury
by October 1, 2024, and should be
ongoing.
21 21
City of
Santa Clara
• Recommendation 4b: The City should
hire an Independent Ethics professional
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES:
Santa Clara City Council and adopt robust ethics training strategies supported by policy. This recommendation
should be implemented by October 1,
2024.
2023-2024 Santa Clara County
Civil Grand Jury
Te 12 3021
22 22
11 7/9/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
• Recommendation 4c: All Councilmembers should
participate in regular training and counseling with an
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES: established outside entity that specializes in government Santa Clara City Council ethics to implement training seminars and workshops for Councilmembers to learn how to maintain collegiality on the dais by using proven techniques and best practices to avoid tense exchanges, bad behavior, misconduct, and
incivility, and how the rest of the Council can positively 2023-2024 Santa Clara County influence the behaviors effectively. This recommendation Civil Grand Jury
w1,200 should be implemented by October 1, 2024, and should be ongoing.
23 23
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
• Recommendation 6: The City should
conduct an annual employee satisfaction
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES:
Santa Clura City Council survey, administered by a third party, which can be answered anonymously. This
recommendation should be implemented
by October 1, 2024, and should occur
2023-2024 Santa Clara County
annually.
Civil Grand Jury
Se 12 M2
24 24
12 7/9/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
• Recommendation 7: The City should
commend City staff for their exemplary
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES:
Santa Clara City Council work ethic and professionalism. This recommendation should be implemented
by August 1, 2024.
2023-2024 Santa Clara County
Civil Grand Jury
312, 300
25 25
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
# Additional Recommendations Requiring Individual Councilmembers' Response 1b* Councilmember Park should attend one-on-one conflict resolution training so he can learn to behave in a manner reflective of an elected official. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024. 1c Councilmember Becker should attend one-on-one conflict resolution training so he can learn to behave in a manner reflective of an elected official. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024. 1d Councilmember Jain should attend one-on-one conflict resolution training to learn to work more effectively for the good of the City. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024. 1e Councilmember Hardy should attend one-on-one conflict resolution training to learn to work more effectively for the good of the City. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024. 1f Councilmember Chahal should attend one-on-one conflict resolution training to learn to work more effectively for the good of the City. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024. 1g Even though Councilmember Watanabe has shown appropriate meeting decorum, the Councilmember should attend one-on-one conflict resolution training to learn how to work effectively in the current challenging Council meeting environment. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024. 26 *The City, as an agency, has also been directed to respond to Recommendation 1b. 26 13
7/9/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
# Additional Recommendations Requiring Individual Councilmembers' Response Even though Mayor Gilmor has shown appropriate meeting decorum, the Mayor should attend one-on-one conflict resolution training to learn how to work effectively in the current challenging Council meeting environment.
Additionally, as the meeting chair, the Mayor should receive training to facilitate effective meeting flow. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024. 2a* Councilmember Becker should pledge to attend trainings in parliamentary procedures so that his behavior is more reflective of an elected who is dedicated to the electorate. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024.
2b* Councilmember Park should pledge to attend trainings in parliamentary procedures so that his behavior is more reflective of an elected who is dedicated to the electorate. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024.
2c* Councilmember Chahal should pledge to attend trainings in parliamentary procedures, so he can demonstrate a better working knowledge of the parliamentary process. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024.
*The City, as an agency, has also been directed to respond to Recommendation 2. 27 27 City of
Santa Clara
The Conter of What's Possible
# Additional Recommendations Requiring Individual Councilmembers' Response 5a Councilmember Park should pledge to train with an ethics expert from an established outside entity that specializes in government ethics. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024, and should occur annually.
5b Councilmember Becker should pledge to train with an ethics expert from an established outside entity that specializes in government ethics. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024, and should occur annually.
5c Councilmember Hardy should pledge to train with an ethics expert from an established outside entity that specializes in government ethics. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024, and should occur annually.
5d Councilmember Chahal should pledge to train with an ethics expert from an established outside entity that specializes in government ethics. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024, and should occur annually.
5e Councilmember Jain should pledge to train with an ethics expert from an established outside entity that specializes in government ethics. This recommendation should be implemented by October 1, 2024, and should occur annually.
28 28
14 7/9/2024 Item 4
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
Legally Required Responses for Recommendations
• Penal Code Section 933.05(b) requires the responding entity to report one of the following actions for each Civil Grand Jury recommendation:
1. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.
2. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation.
3. The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe cannot exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report.
4. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor.
29 29
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
Next Steps
• Staff is requesting that the Council provide direction on the process it would like to follow to develop the City's required responses by September 10, 2024.
• Consistent with past practices, once staff receives Council input, staff is prepared to draft initial responses to the Civil Grand Jury report for each finding and recommendation requiring City response. • Council input could be received tonight, or given tonight's heavy agenda, a special meeting could be scheduled for that purpose. • Staff could then bring draft responses back to the Council for review and possible approval at the August 20, 2024 Council Meeting, or at a special meeting (or meetings) to be determined
30 30
15