Deanna Santana, Santa Clara’s city manager from 2017-2022, has filed a breach of contract lawsuit claiming that the city withheld contracted compensation and benefits when she was dismissed in February 2022. The former top Santa Clara official is also claiming that, at the direction of the San Francisco 49ers, the city discriminated against her based on her race and gender, that her civil rights were violated and she was forced to face harassment in a hostile workplace.
Or as Santana’s lawyer put it: “A competent and celebrated city manager was retaliated and discriminated against, harassed, threatened, and ultimately relieved of her duties for upholding the law.”
Events, Santana’s attorney, Therese Cannata, called “disturbing and, yet all too familiar.”
Santana made the same allegations nearly a year ago in a claim against the city, which, according to the lawsuit, were dismissed by the city. She first threatened to sue Santa Clara in 2021 over a $20,000 cost of living raise.
Santana’s separation agreement entitled her to one year’s full compensation. The lawsuit charges that the city withheld part of Santana’s salary and deferred compensation for IRS 457 and 401(a) accounts* from March 15 through March 31, 2023, withheld cash for accrued leave and converted her sick leave credits to CalPERS service credits without authorization.
The city also, according to Santana, demanded that she “disgorge” $60,000 in 2022 salary, and unsuccessfully attempted to withdraw money from Santana’s deferred compensation retirement accounts.
Santana claims that this breach of contract was part of a harassment campaign against her by San Francisco 49ers. This included retaliation, discrimination and harassment for her race and gender, a hostile work environment, and violation of whistleblower protections; all at the behest of the 49ers, who, Cannata implies, bought the 2020 election.
“In an attempt to obtain a more favorable political environment with less oversight, the 49ers’ franchise flooded an unprecedented $2.9 million into a campaign,” the complaint says.
“The franchise … sought revenge against Ms. Santana … for having the audacity to do her job by pointing out several state code violations, violations of public procurement and contract laws, and questionable administrative practices, resulting in the villainizing of Ms. Santana through several campaign mailers and local blogs during the November 2020 election, and making her compensation a key issue with regards to political strategy and message. The return on that investment was successful,” read the complaint.
Offered in evidence of these allegations are references to a controversial 2022 civil grand jury report, complaints made to the District Attorney that never resulted in investigations, and the use of a derogatory nickname by a local blogger, closely aligned with Mayor Lisa Gillmor. The complaint asserts, without evidence, that “Certain city councilmembers engaged in a ‘quid pro quo’ with the 49ers.”
This alleged campaign by the 49ers, caused Santana and her children great anguish, according to her attorney.
“Because her actions were covered broadly in media articles, the position took a professional toll, By early 2022, Ms. Santana was fearful for her own safety and that of her family’s, having learned by reading a local newspaper** that she and her family were being followed while she was on her own personal time. During this time, Ms. Santana experienced stress along with the related health impacts (e.g., extremely high blood pressure, anxiety/elevated fear, and inability to sleep).”
Santana also claims that the alleged campaign against her was a result of whistleblowing, when she alerted the city council to what she believed were illegalities. However, District Attorney Jeff Rosen — no friend of the 49ers or the Santa Clara city council — didn’t see fit to investigate any of these allegations.
Santana was dismissed after the city’s laborers union — the people who maintain the city’s infrastructure like sewers and water mains — called a strike because Santana blocked raises given to other city unions. Her tenure saw the departure of many experienced employees, and a sizable increase in city payroll.
The Santa Clara city manager is an at-will employee who can be dismissed by the city council at any time for any or no reason. Santana’s compensation package when she was dismissed was $785,000. She is currently the acting city manager of Milpitas.
*IRS 457 and 401(a) accounts are used to give public employees additional retirement benefits beyond what is allowed by the IRS and CalPERS.
**Santana is referring to the website San Jose Inside, which, in 2022, published a story about her then-new Pacific Grove house. Property records and real estate sales are public records.
Poorly written contracts from the beginning. Both with Deanna Santana & and Levi Stadium.
We can thank Gillmor for that. And probably Doyle.
The ultimate irony would be if Santana retains Doyle as her attorney.
I’m looking forward to discovery by City attorneys if this case proceeds.
Seems like she was punished and harassed for being a whistle blower. California law protects employees who report suspected illegal activity from retaliation…
1. At-Will Employment + Termination Authority
As City Manager, Santana was an at-will employee, meaning the city council retained the right to dismiss her for any lawful reason, or none at all. There is no statutory entitlement to continued employment absent clear contractual exceptions.
Although her separation agreement promised one year of compensation, the City’s invocation of a “lack of confidence” to justify her termination appears legally permissible and orderly. Without evidence of explicit wrongdoing or discrimination in the decision-making, the breach-of-contract claim seems weak.
2. Weak Evidence of Discrimination or Retaliation
Santana’s claim relies heavily on allegations that the 49ers influenced city council actions—a sweeping assertion grounded in speculative campaign contributions (a cited $2.9 million), blog posts, and a grand jury report.
Campaign spending, while politically telling, is not itself illegal or proof of direct interference in employment decisions. And the grand jury report cited does not explicitly assign legal wrongdoing; it floats “serious questions” but lacks definitive findings.
The lawsuit also references alleged surveillance and derogatory commentary, but these do not by themselves demonstrate unlawful motive or action tied to Santana’s termination.
3. Lack of Whistleblower Protection Clarity
Santana purports that her termination was retaliatory due to “whistleblowing” on code violations or procurement findings. However, key government investigations—including by the District Attorney—did not proceed, suggesting insufficient evidence.
For whistleblower protections to apply, the plaintiff typically must show: (a) a protected disclosure, and (b) that disclosure was a but-for cause of adverse action. Santana’s lawsuit offers many allegations but limited direct proof of causation or nexus.
4. Highly Personal Narratives Weak in Legal Terms
The complaint emphasizes personal distress—health issues, fear for her safety, surveillance, anguish—none of which are legally actionable unless directly tied to unlawful conduct. Emotional harm cannot substitute for tangible evidence of discriminatory or retaliatory motives.
5. Settlement Talks Underway — Suggesting Weak Case
The fact that the City is already in settlement negotiations may indicate the City perceives an obligation to resolve the matter administratively—rather than admit liability. It could suggest the City prefers avoiding litigation over substantial risks, or that the claims are easier to settle than fight, but not necessarily meritorious.
Given the high bar for race/gender discrimination, whistleblower retaliation, and requiring specific evidence of wrongful motive, Santana’s case appears thin on legally solid ground. Without clearer, documented proof of improper influence and causal linkages, judges are likely to view it as speculative or punitive rather than legitimate.
Well land sakes, if it isn’t Deanna Santana, popping back up like a jack-in-the-box you forgot to put in storage. The former Santa Clara City Manager—who was pulling down a paycheck big enough to make Wall Street blush—is now suing the city for breach of contract, harassment, and enough other grievances to fill a CVS receipt.
This is the same Deanna Santana who walked into City Hall like it was Versailles, treated staff like peasants, and then looked shocked—shocked!—when the help started heading for the exits. She didn’t just run the city; she ran off half the employees who knew how to keep the lights on. And when the laborers’ union—the folks who unclog your toilets and keep the water clean—went on strike because she decided they weren’t worth the same raises other unions got? Well, that’s when the council showed her the door. With her golden parachute stuffed with $785,000 in “parting gifts,” no less.
Now, Santana claims she was the victim of a campaign choreographed by the 49ers. Lord have mercy, the woman always did love a big stage. According to her, Jed York himself must’ve been backstage twirling his mustache, plotting her downfall with evil genius precision. If you listen to her lawyer, it was like the Niners devoted their playbook to one thing: getting rid of Deanna Santana. Forget Super Bowls—what Jed York really wanted was to smite a city manager in Santa Clara.
She says she was discriminated against, harassed, followed, targeted in campaign mailers, smeared on blogs—basically starring in her own political horror flick. The trouble is, none of the actual referees blew the whistle. District Attorney Jeff Rosen, no pal of the Niners, didn’t see a case. The grand jury report wasn’t the magic bullet she hoped for. And the one blogger who called her names? Well, if Santa Clara sued every blogger for bad manners, we’d have to build a new courthouse.
Now she’s clutching her pearls over deferred compensation accounts, sick leave credits, and the city daring—daring!—to ask for $60,000 back. Keep in mind, this woman was paid nearly eight hundred grand to leave. That’s the kind of payout most folks would gladly accept with a thank-you card and a cab ride home. But not Deanna. Oh no. She’s still pounding the table, still demanding more, and still painting herself as Joan of Arc in a hostile workplace.
Let’s call it plain: Santana wasn’t a victim of the Niners, or the council, or bloggers with too much time on their hands. She was a victim of her own hubris. When you run a city like a fiefdom, treat staff like serfs, and block raises for the folks who keep the sewers running, don’t be surprised when the pitchforks come out.
The people of Santa Clara deserve leadership, not lawsuits. They deserve a city manager who works for the public, not for their own golden parachute. And if Deanna Santana really wants to be remembered as “competent and celebrated”? Well, honey, she should’ve tried being competent and celebrated when she had the job.
I think Ms. Santana needs to look in the mirror and see who was doing the harassing. It was not uncommon for her to verbally lash out at City Councilmembers during meetings. She treated them as second-class citizens who were only there to do her biding. I think her actions and demeanor have come back to roost. Her treatment of others was supposed to be acceptable and now she thinks that she was discriminated against? I think not. She should really try to leave with some amount of dignity before even more about her behavior comes to light.
The plot thickens. This is the same City Manager that was telling Councilmembers one week to delete texts messages to the next week in a live council meeting saying the new city council at the time was destructive. The council was destructive in taking Deanna Santana out of City Management and saved the city of Santa Clara from the mercenary of the bay area. It now connects the dots by referencing in her filings that former Councilmember Anthony Becker was a mastermind who orchestrated the removal with the 49ers instructions and the continued references of the grand jury report. This narrative is something also former disgraced City Attorney Brian Doyle would say to in his failed suit against the city. This is for certain proof that Gillmor’s mafia minions, Deanna Santana and Brian Doyle went to the civil grand jury with a audience of grand jurors willing to listen and do something about it. It was about the narrative, it was about getting a mafia type message across to the community and this was not about a judge rejecting it all they know that. It was like the suit filed against the city for the Measure B campaign to change the elected chief about its ballot language. This was intentional cause its about the headlines and narratives. This only matters to Santa Clara cause then the Santa Clara POA can use it in their fancy campaign mailers and on Robert Haugh’s slime crime blog. This is organized crime and racketeering. Deanna Santana and Brian Doyle continue to hang around because Gillmor is promising them something in return. Any former employee who continues to hang around their employer like Brian Doyle does or how Deanna Santana just won’t go away it is like disgruntled employees who harass their former employer. Their narratives have fueled grand jury reports and headlines like these and on Robert Haughs blog and the SF Chronicle and damaged lives. But that is ok because that is the business of corruption. The fact that they got a civil grand jury to listen and then release reports about these lies then reference them in their own lawsuits is sociopathic just like how Gillmor does all the time, always back to the grand jury reports.
When I attended the Parade of Champions dinner last week, I noticed that the table that stood out like something from the movies The Godfather and Goodfellas. It was the Gillmor mafia table that sat Don Lisa Gillmor herself dressed in innocent white while you had surrounding her was mother Teresa ONeill, library trustee Debbie Tryforos, former failed district 5 candidate David Kertes and Vice Mayor Kelly Cox with her boyfriend District 3 hopeful Christian Pellecchia. It is a table of the untouchables those who crime in public and have people in power that will never touch them or go after them. Remember everyone if they did it before in 2022 2024 they will surely do it again for 2026 and that is why Deanna and Doyle are sticking around. Maybe Gillmor promised them that she will bring them back after she takes supermajority on Council in 2026 or early and terminating Jovan Grogan and Glen Googins. The goal is also to get Kevin Park and Suds Jain off the council before their terms expire and get Teresa ONeill and David Kertes to replace them. This is all about taking majority back and Gillmor is essentially almost their. This is a very subtle Santa Clara coup taking place. Burt Field keeps saying it in all his posts and comments that better days are coming when he and his Gillmor mafia take full control of the city again.
The timing of Deanna Santana’s filing is so convenient after the current attacks by Robert Haugh with Councilmember Kevin Park and former Councilmember Anthony Becker’s conviction is not a surprise. She wants revenge against them both because Becker called the meeting to terminate her and Park said the word ‘dog’ and more. Santana told those around her at city hall that she could not stand Park or Becker. Probably cause they saw through her manipulation. This is retaliation by Santana in the most sadistic sense. She has all the money she needs in the world yet the Gillmor mafia influence is helping her.
The more you think about it and after what I witnessed at the parade of champion fundraising dinner was Teresa ONeill and David Kertes going around gossiping about how bad the council is, the 49ers, Deanna Santana and Kevin Park.
You’re quite the conspiracy theorist Roger. I was also at the table at the Parade of Champions dinner/auction. Can’t you just accept that there were a bunch of friends that enjoyed an evening out to support a good cause? I know my wife and I enjoyed it as did all of us at the table.
But I’m glad you were able to fantasize about what you actually thought was going on at our table.
Burt Field’s comments are simply professing his hope for better days ahead for our city and to get rid of those who are beholden to Jed York.