For nearly two years, City staff and the Governance and Ethics Committee (GEC) have been working with a consultant on a replacement for Santa Clara’s award-winning Code of Ethics & Values.
The effort has taken place largely behind closed doors, with no public announcement, no community participation, and no public hearings.
At any moment, the proposed replacement could be sent to the City Council.
That is why we describe this situation as Code Red.
What Residents Should Know
Santa Clara adopted its current values-based Code of Ethics & Values in 2000 after a two-year community process involving residents, staff, commissioners, and council members.
The code was designed to help leaders make difficult decisions in ways that build public trust, not simply comply with legal requirements. The Code defined ethics as the way public officials act when they are at their best earning public trust.
The proposed replacement is moving in the opposite direction.
Four Problems
The concerns fall into four areas:
1. The Consultant
The Council directed staff to hire an independent consultant to review the City’s ethics and behavioral standards.
Instead, the City hired an employment lawyer from the City’s long-time labor law firm, not an ethics consultant and not independent in the ordinary sense of the word.
The distinction matters because employment law focuses on minimizing liability, while values-based ethics focuses on building public trust.
2. The Process
The 2001 Code was created through an open, public, two-year consensus process. Stakeholders developed a shared set of city core values, the ethics standards and principles align with each value, clear descriptions of what the values look like in practice. The overall purpose was to build public trust and make Santa Clara’s workplace a preferred place of employment.
The proposed replacement has no stated goals, no document review, and no clear rationale for why the consensus code was scrapped, rather than built upon.
The proposed replacement has been developed almost entirely behind closed doors, with the public given virtually no opportunity to review or participate. The RFQ (the job posting) described a very limited role for the public, only involving them during the public hearing before the Council. Best practice for real ethics code development involves the public at every step.
If a City wanted to design a process to prevent meaningful public participation, it’s hard to imagine how it would differ from this process.
3. The Product
The proposed replacement rejects Santa Clara’s values-based ethics code and returns the city to a rules-based compliance code, much like the Code the City abandoned 25 years ago because it was not practical or helpful.
Instead of setting a high standard for ethical leadership, the replacement largely focuses on following existing ethics laws — the minimum required.
It also appears to:
- apply only to City Council members
- not apply to the Stadium Authority
- eliminate the clear descriptions of what the values look like in practice
- eliminate most behavioral standards
- omit clear provisions for ethics training and accountability.
Breaking the law always damages or destroys public trust, but following the law does not earn public trust. No one brags at the end of the day, “Hey, we followed the law today.”
4. What Happens Next
The proposal may soon move toward Council approval, with key votes already aligned.
That process can still be interrupted — but only if residents insist on meaningful public review and on maintaining the highest standards of public and professional ethics.
Santa Clara’s ethics code does need updating. New issues such as the Stadium Authority and independent expenditures should be addressed.
But the prudent path is to build on the community consensus embodied in the 2001 Code, not discard it.
→ Read the full analysis:
How the Ethics Code Consultant Was Selected