Public Trust Partners Community Standards

Public Ethics Now, Advocates for Public Trust

Why These Standards Matter


Calling for ethical leadership and rebuilding public trust require a space where residents can speak honestly, listen deeply, truly be heard, and work together to improve the city's quality of life.

Some cities have created safe public spaces where meaningful dialogue can happen without fear of retaliation or ridicule. Santa Clara is not one of those cities. In fact, when too many residents showed up to speak at Council meetings, the Council's Governance and Ethics Committee discussed moving public comment to the end of the meeting—effectively silencing working families who can't stay until midnight. 

These Community Standards create that space—where Santa Clara stakeholders can speak about their experiences, listen to understand different perspectives, test ideas and debate solutions vigorously while treating each other with respect, challenging power structures constructively, and building trust to support officials who want to lead ethically.

Why Public Deliberation Is Needed Now

Background: From Excellence to Crisis

Santa Clara once led the nation in ethics, and residents noticed. In 2008, 91% of residents believed the city was "moving in the right direction." UNESCO listed Santa Clara as one of two "best practice" cities worldwide for election ethics. It took 12 years for that reputation to build.

It took another 12 years to dismantle. No public votes killed the ethics program—that happened behind closed doors. Again, the public noticed.  Today, about 40% of residents believe the city is moving in the right direction.

The Current Reality

The Council and staff rarely discuss ethics, despite three Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury reports (2022, 2024) documenting ethics failures by both the City Council and Stadium Authority. The Council/Stadium Authority rejected most findings and recommendations.

Five of seven Council members, who benefited from $13 million in political spending by the 49ers since 2020, regularly vote 5-2 on issues favorable to the team.  The Civil Grand Jury concluded these five "can and do put the interests of the 49ers above those of the public."  Neither the majority nor the City Attorney make any effort to resolve the apparent conflict of interest when the city's stadium tenant spends $13 million to get its selected council members/Stadium Authority elected.    

But Cities Can Change Quickly

If a large number of residents say clearly "Enough!" change becomes possible. These standards help create the conditions for that change by building the community capacity needed to advance ethical leadership, good governance, and public trust.

Guidelines for Participation

DO:

  1. Criticize or challenge issues, policies, and systems—not personalities
  2.  Provide evidence and sources for factual claims
  3. Try to understand deeper interests and needs, not just positions people have taken
  4. Acknowledge when you're uncertain or speculating
  5. Respect different viewpoints and lived experiences
  6. Treat everyone the way you would treat honored guests in your home
  7. Use your PEN name consistently to build trust
  8. Frame criticism constructively: Turn criticism into positive goals for the next time we do the program.  (For example, instead of criticizing, "Candidate X's volunteers stole my signs. Turn it into a positive goal:  Next time, no one steals campaign signs.)
  9.  Distinguish between ethics failures and honest mistakes
  10. Ask clarifying questions before assuming intent

DON'T:

  1. Attack other community members characters
  2. Share or attempt to discover others' real identities
  3. Post information you know or suspect is false
  4. Use your PEN name to evade accountability for harmful speech
  5. Impersonate officials, organizations, or other PEN names
  6. Assume bad faith when good faith explanations are possible
  7. Discourage others from participating through intimidation
  8. Make definitive claims about others' motivations or character

Moderating the Discussion

We moderate with a light touch, trusting the community to self-regulate most of the time. Our goal is education and course-correction, not punishment.

We Will:

  1. Invite any community member to alert Dr. Shanks to any posts that appear to violate these standards. Use the "Alert Moderators" button in the footer or in other places
  2. Remove comments that clearly violate these standard
  3. Issue private warnings for first-time or borderline violations
  4. Work with members to understand and correct problematic patterns
  5. Provide clear explanations when we take action
  6. Protect members who report violations from retaliation

We Will Suspend or Remove Accounts When Someone:

  1. Repeatedly violates standards after warnings
  2. Causes serious harm to other members
  3. Uses their PEN name in bad faith to evade accountability
  4. Attempts to identify or expose other members
  5. Engages in illegal activity

We Will Report to Authorities:

  1. Credible threats of violence
  2. Evidence of illegal activity
  3. Attempts to hack, dox, or otherwise compromise the system

Privacy Commitment

Your PEN name protects you from retaliation. We protect your real identity:

  1. Only verified Santa Clara stakeholders can participate  (Stakeholder=anyone concerned about Santa Clara ethics)
  2. Your real name and contact information are encrypted
  3. No one but the site administrator has access to your identity
  4. We will never sell, share, or leak your information
  5. You can delete your account and data at any time (Through the Withdraw button in the footer)
  6. We use industry-standard security protocols

    See the Privacy Policy link at the top of the page for complete details.

    The Spirit of These Standards

    These rules exist to create the conditions for honest dialogue about difficult topics. We're all learning together how to rebuild trust—in our institutions, in each other, and in the democratic process itself.

    Some conversations will be uncomfortable. Some will surface real disagreements that can't be easily resolved. That's okay. That's democracy. What matters is that we engage each other with the respect we'd want for ourselves, the patience to understand before judging, and the courage to speak truth while leaving space for others to do the same.

    We're not asking for perfect agreement. We're asking for good faith, mutual respect, and a genuine commitment to making Santa Clara's governance and future better. If you can contribute to those things,  you belong here.