San Jose Inside

In an environment bereft of courageous and selfless acts, the recent decision by our fire chief stands out in fascinating relief.  When Jeff Clet stepped down from his position so that he would not run afoul of the nepotism rules of San Jose, he clearly committed a principled and noteworthy act. He certainly deserves our praise.  The traditions of the San Jose Fire Department are hallowed and have served the city well; they have given many sons, and I hope more daughters, the ability to follow their fathers into a noble and invaluable profession. We need more of this type of service.

With the advent of the summer festival season of events in San Jose—the Grand Prix, Jazz Festival and Zero One Festival—we are indeed approaching a time of fun, enjoyment, and wonderment. Yet, it was not long ago when a visit to our city would be considered out of the question for many in the valley and Bay Area. Not any more.

It is clear from yesterday’s special meeting that the only thing the city council can do to the mayor in the wake of his indictment is whack him with a wet noodle, take away his gas allowance, and allow him only bread and water. There is no provision or process in the Charter to remove the mayor from office, and the council apparently cannot now pass an ordinance addressing impeachment and apply it retroactively without violating the mayor’s civil rights. What is also clear is that, if there was such an impeachment procedure in place, the council would now invoke it in light of the mayor’s refusal to resign, and he would be history.

Well, the votes are all in and the winners and loser are clear.  To the extent that people did not participate, they and we lost; to those who did, and read San Jose Inside, thanks for what you do and the diligence you apply to it.  Adlai Stevenson once said that, after a loss, it was like stubbing your toe—it hurts too much to laugh and you’re too old to cry. We should all cry for the depths that our city has fallen; we should decry the timid and dishonest campaigning for the top spot in the city.  Current council members should have the sense to understand repudiation and be ashamed for their active or tacit part in the past disgraceful performance of this council.

With public dissatisfaction of local, state and national leadership running at levels of 60 percent (Schwarzenegger), 75 percent (Bush), 90 percent (Congress), and nearly 100 percent (Gonzales), this election brings voters a chance to effect real change in all aspects of government. We could hardly do worse, unless we enable more of the same. We must ensure that we eliminate those agents of our dissatisfaction from contention. This may be the overriding factor in making choices on Election Day.

As much as I try to stay in a good mood, nothing, other than a Shark loss to Edmonton, gets me as riled as looking at the current seal of the City of San Jose.  The basic logo, with the rising sun symbol, was chosen when I was mayor, and I still like it—but the recent addition of the caption, “10th Largest U.S. City,” was a defensive, clueless decision that just shrieks “bush league.”  The old caption, “Capital of Silicon Valley,” although a reach, said so much and associated us with the most dynamic entrepreneurial spot in the history of mankind.  Apparently, it didn’t reach enough.

Just a few ramblings about the mayor’s race this week:

A few people who attended the Hyde Park Neighborhood’s Mayoral Forum last Thursday all had the same thing to say about the San Jose mayoral candidates—they all look tired, worn-out and “beat to a pulp.”  I think it’s fitting to liken running for mayor to the Sharks trying to win the Stanley Cup—it’s hard to do and you get a lot of nicks and bruises along the way.  But, how much weight do those forums really hold? Are the candidates burning the candle at both ends for nothing?

Joins a Growing List of Retired Generals Urging the Defense Secretary to Give Up His Post

After a unanimous vote supporting his publicly funded election proposal, and perhaps feeling a confidence he hasn’t felt since his reelection, Mayor Ron Gonzales made a bold bid for the national spotlight Wednesday by joining with several retired generals in demanding the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

The big debate is over; the big question remains.  I think most will agree that the mayoral debate last week was one of the best political forums in recent San Jose history and a resounding success.  The venue was spectacular, the format informative and—aside from the moderator’s too active participation—the five candidates were impressive. 

I was present at the first mayoral debate at the California Theatre last Thursday because I was interested to see how each of the five candidates would cope with the pressure of having to stand up to one another while answering some potentially difficult questions. 

Tomorrow evening (Thursday, March 30, 5 p.m.) at the California Theatre, there will be a first of sorts—the first big debate on who should be the next mayor.  It will be sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce, the Downtown Association, the Silicon Valley Leadership Group and the Business Journal.  Although a late attempt to make it a straw poll is apparently off now, it might yet occur; so much the better.  It is the unknown quantities and unscripted moments of these debates that really tend to enliven and inform.

I was on a bike ride with my friend the other day and we decided to take the path through the new Guadalupe River Park.  We rode our bikes to Coleman and got on the path to ride towards the Arena and on to Willow Glen, but were frustrated by what we encountered.  It turns out that we should have brought a compass, night-vision goggles and a periscope, because riding a mere 15 feet without a fork in the road was impossible.  The path is broken up by chain-linked fences that either force you to turn back, return you unwillingly back up to the street, or send you through a confusing maze in another direction.  On one turn, we ended up taking our bikes over a rickety railway crossing, only to be turned back on the other side, forcing us to go back over the tracks and retrace our steps.