Honesty, Fiscal Responsibility and Open Government

By Chuck Reed, Guest Blogger

I started trying to make San Jose a great place to live, work and raise a family over 25 years ago but today we face problems that threaten our success.  Some things are broken and must be fixed.  That’s why I am focusing my campaign for Mayor on Honesty, Fiscal Responsibility and Open Government.

Last year was good year for bad examples of the things that are broken and need to be fixed in City Hall:

• A $45 million surprise budget increase for furniture and technology for the new city hall.

• Censure of Councilmember Gregory for trolling for gifts and shaking down businesses.

• Senior staff lying about Cisco’s involvement in the network for the new city hall and not complying with the Public Records Act.

• An $11 million surprise bill for a secret deal with a garbage company made by the Mayor and hidden from the Council and the public.

We can fix these problems and others like them, if the Mayor takes the lead. Honesty, Fiscal Responsibility and Open Government have to be made top priorities.  The Mayor has to talk about them to the public and the staff.  The Mayor has take Councilmembers to task when they cross the line. We need to make it easier to do the right thing than the wrong thing.  We need to make it better to tell the truth than to hide the truth.

There are three essential first steps to make that happen:

1.  The City must fully embrace open government.  At my request, the Council approved a protocol for disclosure of records so that the people have access to City records.  Unfortunately, the staff failed to implement the protocol.  The Mayor and the Council must make sure that we do much better.  If we are truly open to full public scrutiny, many bad things just won’t happen.  If you know what you do is going to made public, you will want to do the right thing.

2.  We need full disclosure of all fund raising by the Mayor and Councilmembers   We need to know if Councilmembers are constantly calling developers, land owners and other people doing business with the city and asking for big bucks for their favorite causes. That feeds a Pay-to-Play culture, and we need full disclosure so we can stop it.

3.  We need to bring and end to the Mini Mayor form of government that allows Councilmembers to act as District Dictators who can violate the City Charter by giving orders to city employees, coercing staff to make a particular recommendations and extracting financial concessions from developers to fund pet projects.

All of these things require leadership by example.  The Mayor has to lead from the front.  That is the only way we can succeed. The people will not believe us if we are not Honest,  and they will not trust our numbers if we are not Fiscally Responsible.  If we do not have an Open Government, the people cannot know if we are Honest and Fiscally Responsible.

43 Comments

  1. Hey “I will be the Next SJ Mayor “,

    Tell us your name.  There are only two official candidates so far; I don’t think your the other.

    As for Mr. Reed…

    please get involved in issues concerning downtown.  It’s been a mess down here since the current mayor and council person took office.  Downtown is important to many poeple; as you can see by it’s dominance in this blog.

    Please don’t just show up at a downtown association meeting and answer some stupid canned questions from the executive director.

    Talk to actual business owners, residents and other stakeholders down here.

    Downtown business owner

  2. Mr. Reed,

    We hear much about disclosure but what does that really mean to San Jose residents?  As far as I can tell disclosure in the city of San Jose stops in a filing cabinet in the city clerk’s office.  Most of us will never have the time or resources to know what is actually being disclosed with all the new rules.  We should not consider information disclosed until it is presented on the city of San Jose web site in an easy to access, searchable format.  Anything less, we should assume that politicians still have something to hide. 

    For years candidates have disclosed contributions to their campaigns but who has the time to go down the the clerks office and wade through all the data.  The Mercury News rarely prints detailed information about each district’s candidates and their contributions so the information might as well not exist. 

    I hope you will set the example in your run for Mayor by placing all your campaign contribution information in a searchable format on your web site if the city does not provide such information on its web site.

  3. I will reveal myself publicly, not here, to the voters and residents of San Jose. I want this to be a surprise, kind of like what Arnold did. Also, I don’t want to tip off the others as to my strategy. I have time to file and prepare.

  4. I do think the “mini-mayors” issue needs to be studied. 

    Everything else stated by Mr. Reed strikes me as no-brainers for any new mayor.

    I also don’t think Mr. Reed will make downtown a priority, which it still needs to be until it’s finally done right and becomes a destination for shopping as well as entertainment.  The current daytime experience downtown is just a bunch of worker bees in buildings who come out at lunch time to give the appearance that something is happening downtown.

    Nobody who is running for mayor comes across as inspirational or passionate or as having what it takes to get this town the respect it needs.  Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  5. Hi Chuck,
    Thanks for your post – I carefully read it and nowhere could I find a ‘vision’ reference.  That alone gets my vote.  smile

    Your message and 3 bullet points are spot on.

  6. Sounds good if you really follow through on these things.
    You did not mention the importance of having a City Manager who will also tell the Mayor and the Council when they cross over the line. We currently have a CM who only does what the Mayor tells him to do. This is a dangerous way to run a city.
    As for public records requests, the response has been to “throw the baby out with the bath water.” Rather than make sure the CM’s office gets a clue on how to respond to these requests, a grand ultimatum came down to all, regardless of whether they had been properly handling the requests for their departments or not. A very inefficient way to handle this.
    You are right about the mess of the mini-mayors. This structure has led to more bad decisions than could be imagined. The need for district elections has been surpassed by the need to end them. Councilmembers can be elected with a tiny number of votes yet they can make decisions that adversely impact the entire city. Councilmembers need to be accountable to all.
    Finally, you talk about leadership by example. That would certainly be a refreshing change from our current leadership by bad example. Good luck in your quest.

  7. I agree with mark T.  Mr. Reed needs to make downtown a priority, not the ethic issues.  He must tell us what he has in mind for downtown and how he would make downtown thrive for years to come.

  8. Mr. Reed,

    Thank you for letting us know that you are running for mayor.  I must however insist that you give us more than this piece of junior high expository writing assignment you wrote
    if you want to be seriously considered to become the next mayor of San Jose.

  9. You and the other council members who have taken proactive efforts to achieve these 3 very worthwhile Honesty, Fiscal Responsibility and Open Government goals for San Jose city government are to be thanked for the limited successes so far. Many residents believe that much additional work needs to be done if San Jose is to meet these goals.

    The City Council needs to fully embrace open, honest and fiscally responsible truly representative government and must go beyond disclosure of records since the consultants whose job it is to try to influence public policy for their client’s financial advantage will always find a way around any rules or other procedures.

    The residents generally do not have the time, energy or knowledge to monitor these complex rules or procedures or all of the proposals before City Council.

    The City Manager’s office is constrained by the revised city charter amendment that created a strong mayor / city council heavily influenced by various special interests and a weak city manager form of government resulting in the public having less than effective voice when the special interests advocate for policies that are questionable or against the residents best interests

    The City Manger and the department heads are afraid to clearly and strongly voice their professional opinions about public policy issues, procedures and various project proposals since the City Council is generally unwilling to support them against the special interests or to always have open public policy discussions with the residents where decisions will not be made before the public discussion is completed as we frequently see.

    It is politically easy to talk about open, honest and fiscal responsible representative government but actually doing real reform is difficult. Much of the current talk, we find to be about as useful as most residents have found when they address City Council for their 2 minutes when prior to the meeting the “deal was done”  at the urging of a council members special interest campaign supporters who have a financial interest in the decision

    Public tax subsidies to private companies which it often stated as being in the public interest are almost never audited, and will regardless of an disclosure rules continue to be “ Pay for Play “ politics but in a revised manner that does not violate the new rules until audits are done and the City Council or others having the responsibility are held accountable.

    Many of our elected officials both local, state and national have been measured by these 3 standards and the public has found them wanting. San Jose residents and their neighborhood associations would like to see you and the other candidates for Mayor specifically define complete comprehensive definations of Honesty, Fiscal Responsibility and Open ( Representative ) Government to address the obvious issues and conflicts of interest we are all aware of. This will go a long way in earning the respect and vote for Mayor of the residents

    Progress has been made. You and others are to be thanked but significantly progress and changes still need to be done if real versus talked about reform is to be accomplished. 

    San Jose should be known not only as the safest large city but also have the most representative and cleanest city government in America.

  10. Chuck:

    Your positions are all good but the real choices a mayor makes are personnel matters.

    Will you keep Borgsdorf and Guerra?  Your answer to this question will gain or lose you lots of votes.

  11. Does anybody remember council member Virginia Schafer back in the 60’s?  She voted “NO” on everything.  Mr Reed seems to be a kinder gentler version of Ms. Schafer.  While rubber stamping with a “yes” vote is no way for a council member to behave, voting “no” can be couter-productive. 
    It will be interesting to hear more from the candidates.  Given the behaviors of the sitting council and mayor, Mr. Reed comes off as the voice of reason at City Hall these days.  But I’m not ready to hand him my vote until I hear more from him and the rest of the field.

  12. Chuck Reed’s essay above provides a target-rich environment, but I’ll discuss just two points.

    First, his claim to endorse “honesty” was betrayed in January 2004 when he told representatives of the largely Asian-American neighborhood on the east side of Coyote Creek near Berryessa Road that he was still studying the matter of allowing Graniterock to expand northward—which neighbors feared would create new problems for the neighborhood.

    He was busted the next evening at the city council meeting when a memo was passed around signed by him and the mayor four days earlier endorsing the Graniterock expansion.

    Not overly “honest,” it would appear, what with two different stories in the same week. By the way, Graniterock won with Reed’s support. The neighborhood lost.

    Second, his claim to support “open government” was permanently put to rest earlier this year when he led the fight, backed by the mayor and downtown’s council member, to close down the investigation into Cisco’s involvement in the network for the new city hall. I saw the debate and Reed unquestionably understood an investigator’s statement that several thousand pages of email copies still remained for study, even as Reed argued to end the investigation.

    Not overly keen on “open government,” it would appear, what with his rush to quash the investigation.

    Dale Warner

  13. This is the whole problem with San Jose.

    Sure, Mr. Reed has identified the main issues but he has niether the leadership or sheer force to make any changes – that is obvious to anyone that has met him.

    In another time of our great city, when we had better politicians, Chuck Reed wouldn’t even be running for Mayor.

    We CANNOT have leaders with the peronality of table chairs – it will not work!

    Thanks, but no thanks, Chuck!

  14. Ok, so now we know why some of you think Reed is not the guy for the job. Tell us then, given the plethora of possible candidates, who is the person to fill the Tower of Gonzo on Santa Clara Street?

  15. Cortese? He sometimes talks the talk, but be careful…he thinks he can run the city on his own, ordering staff to do this and that. That’s a direct violation. If that is how he operates as a councilmember, one can only imagine how he would operate as mayor. No thanks. One mayor who thinks he is king is enough for this decade.

  16. I agree Chuck knows what the issues are , but yes, I think people want to hear HOW things are going to change.  I am so depressed we have to have Gonzo in office for two more years of doing nothing but swivelling around in his new leather chairs and watching TV on his new flatscreens in City Hall.

  17. Geez, cut Chuck Reed a little slack. He does bear some responsibility with what is going on at City Hall but you can’t lump him in there with Gonzales. He is an honest person and is standing behind what he is preaching – honesty and ethics. Downtown does need to be a priority but don’t you think that the huge lack of morals and ethics is an even larger problem?

    We need someone in the Mayors office that people can work with, not someone who stand behind their chief of staff or spokesperson. Give Chuck, Dave, and anyone else the chance to show that they can be that Mayor!

  18. In response to post #25 the answer is obvious: Andy Diaz!
    His numerous campaigns for public office give him vast political experience unmatched by any other possible candidate. Plus he has the added benefit of being untainted by any support from Phaedra and her “volunteer” minions, The Chamber’s business bucks or the Manufacturing Group’s string-pulling.
    Besides, Andy won’t need anybody’s support…he already has the signs from the last 20 campaigns.

  19. “Ok, so now we know why some of you think Reed is not the guy for the job. Tell us then, given the plethora of possible candidates, who is the person to fill the Tower of Gonzo on Santa Clara Street?”

    Santa Claus
    Easter Bunny
    Bill Chew
    Kermit the Frog

  20. Chuck, I am going to ask you to get on board with three to four issues right here and now, and let us see where you are with them in six months, ok?

    1)  You and the Airport Commission need to tell all of us that back San Jose State, where you are with all those dumb talk about moving the Aeronautics Department back to the main campus, which Don Kassing acutally supports, which is a wacky idea.  Chuck, you know, Tom, Jude, RR, Dale, Ed Rast, and all the other bloggers on this site that having an aeronautics program that does not function at an airport is just dumb.  We better damn well have those students handle real airplane tools and real airplanes.  This is the Don Kassing project to help Airbus beat Boeing.

    2)  Are you for open government in all institutions, state and local, and will you always write a friend of the issue letter to any state agency that blocks access to any citizen that is located in San Jose?

    3)  Do you believe, as a believe in fair campaign practices that last minute, third party tactics are BAD news in the political scene?

    Well?

  21. OOh, “I will be the next SJ Mayor” has a novel approach to campaigning—post to a blog anonymously.

    Maybe if he wins he won’t show up at The Taj Gonzal.  Think of how much better off we’ll all be with a no-name absentee mayor!

    John Michael O’Connor

  22. CM Chuck,

    “Window dressing” is not good! You can do much better for the Color comunities if you wish to be the next mayor for the City of San Jose.

    Asian voices

  23. I’m voting for Reed and will volunteer for his campaign if he’ll have me.

    Reed is a leader not a politician.  San Jose is a mess and I believe that Reed is the only one who can fix it.

    Cortese is a political weathervane that points in whatever direction the political winds are blowing.  Chavez as mayor would be the equivalent of four more years of Gonzales!

  24. Honesty, integrity.. that includes having local NAACP official declare your opposition a bigot one day before the election, not allowing him to respond. You had the election anyway, why? Yes, and as a City employee I am one of those who sees the daily US flag on your chest as increasingly disenguious.

    If you can revert the shame I feel as a CIty employee, given the rutheless underhanded tactics of the RDA and the supporting cast (council, mayor, commission), back to some pride, more power to you. And to hell with style.  Substance is what we need, which is why Pandori is the current obvious choice so far, for this citizen.

  25. Chuck Reed is a dyed-in-the-wool Republican. Why should I believe that his ideology is any different from that of the national Republican platform, an ideology that promotes bigotry and torture over tolerance and human rights and justifies an illegal, immoral war based on lies and deception. And let’s not forget that it is the Republican party that is at the center of the biggest political corruption scandals this country has ever witnessed.

    Chuck Reed was the ONLY city council member to vote AGAINST extending partner benefits to gay and lesbian city employees. The objection he voiced during this historic city council vote exposed him as a homophobic neanderthal grossly out of step with the 21st century and obediently in-step with his goose-stepping fellow Republicans Rick Santorum, Bill Frist, Tom Delay, and Resident Bush.

  26. Mr. Reed,

    Hello!

    Per your comment in the message “We can fix these problems and others like them, if the Mayor takes the lead. Honesty, Fiscal Responsibility and Open Government have to be made top priorities”.

    As an active community leader and President of Cory Neighborhood, myself and Dan (V.P.) have worked for several years with the City to have a “Fair” share of funding to maintain our neighborhood.

    As you know by now measure A&B (BAREC) has passed in Santa Clara allowing the go ahead for building affordable senior living and one hundred single family homes. This will increase traffic that is already heavy. This along with the expansion of Valleyfair the congestion of traffic will become an over flow nightmare to our neighborhood.

    This has been a concern for the neighbors of Cory due to the fact that we will feel the brunt of additional traffic and congestion in our neighborhood.

    Cory will become a short cut and main artery for all over flow of traffic. With this will come many concerns for safety, traffic calming solutions, police presence and funding from the city to ensure Cory has the adequate attention from you and the city.

    We met with the DOT and other members of your team and the answer is simple – “the city has no funds”.

    If this is the case why is so much money and time being spent on the “Little Saigon” issue.

    You speak of fiscal responsibility, if this is a true goal of yours the “Little Saigon” should have never come about until you have a balanced budget.

    As we of Cory have been told by the city – if we find private funding then we may be able to have the things done that the city should be doing for us.

    Little Saigon should NOT use one penny of the city money, or redevelopment money period!

    Just say No!

    I would rather see money invested in areas that will benifit San Jose as a whole.

    It would be nice to see you and your staff take a clear stance and show true leadership and freeze all pay across the board until the budget is balanced. Top management in the city should also take an immediate 10% cut in pay to show that you are serious about making change.

    It’s ok to say “No” to unions. We do not want to be the next Vallejo – do we?

    I respect your effort and as a tax payer and community leader want to see you succeed.

    Lets make the right decisions now that will benefit San Jose in the future.

    Regards

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *