On June 3, the San Jose City Council passed the controversial promoter ordinance that will regulate downtown nightlife by imposing fees and mandatory permits on event promoters and organizers. I don’t want to put too much on it, but the day after the ordinance passed, it was like someone had shot live entertainment in the head.
For the council, who voted unanimously for it, the issue was seen as a necessity of scale. As Councilman Liccardo said, “This city is growing very quickly. We want to make sure people who are out there hosting events which draw hundreds or thousands of patrons are doing so responsibly.” But for many San Jose residents, particularly the younger generations, this whole thing was a bit like a San Jose 2008 version of that 1980’s movie “Footloose,” where Kevin Bacon’s character and other youths rebel against the city establishment in their righteous quest for personal freedoms. They just wanted to dance, man. The other option was to “tear up this town.” I don’t really remember how the movie ended, but what I do remember is that they all came together to make their stand—the clumsy jocks, the pretty girls, even the mysterious 30-year-old looking high school kid from out of town.
This is how it went down in San Jose too. Cultural enthusiasts from all walks of artistry—rockers, hip hop MCs, visual artists and poets of all the many ethnicities of San Jose—came together in an unprecedented coalition called the San Jose Nightlife and Entertainment Committee to assert their concern with the promoters ordinance and the direction of downtown. And while the ordinance still passed, their unity created an oppositional force that can hang its hat on several measurable victories, and, more importantly, injected the political conversation around the future of downtown with voices that rarely are part of the discourse.
At the council meeting, dozens of San Jose musicians and promoters, many entering City Hall for the first time, spoke against the ordinance. Their attendance was a culmination of months of work the group had done. They held regular meetings, researched the ordinance and related laws, debated strategy, and forced stakeholder meetings with Liccardo and Mayor Reed’s office. They were responsible for the council putting the brakes on passing the ordinance in April, clarifying the once ambiguous term “promoter,” and the evolution of the ordinance which now emphasizes contracts between promoter and club owner, thus exempting permit requirements when protected by contracts.
June 3 may have seen a low voter turnout in the election, but that evening, participatory democracy was active, inclusive, and potentially transformative. While voting for candidates is important, it is these moments, where stakeholders are fully entering the decision-making process rather than just checking a box, that can change local politics. But even if people feel the issue is so important they can take the time to have a civic life, it can still be a daunting process.
The truth is, speaking at the public comment section at a City Council meeting can be an intimidating experience. You are speaking in front of people you usually have only seen in the newspaper or on a brochure and who are sitting in elevated seating, like a judge. You have two minutes, sometimes one, to get out everything you’ve been wanting to say for months, running through as much as possible before Mayor Reed says the most cutting four-letter word you’ve heard on your life: “Time.” The worst is when you look up, see the council people staring blankly at their computer screens, and you’re not sure if they were listening to you or checking their MySpace.
That is why, win or lose, groups coming together and actively challenging policies that effect their lives are due respect. Opposing the status quo requires courage, and creates a dynamic political scene in the process. The challenge, of course, is the group persisting beyond the moment of crisis.
One of the most powerful groups I’ve seen address the council was the flea market vendors, who came together and created a business association when they got news of the shutdown. They had so many people addressing the council at meetings that Mayor Reed cut the public comments down to one minute. Like the San Jose Nightlife and Entertainment Committee, they changed the landscape of the conversation, even though they didn’t get the final result they wanted. And, like the Nightlife and Entertainment group, who knows what could have happened if they were allowed into the process earlier. But now, although the shutting down of the current location is a done deal, the possibility of the flea market being moved to another San Jose location rather than being destroyed is still there because of the existence of this group.
The same opening—being relevant and present for the future direction of the city—may be available to this whole new group of downtowners now that they have a battle at City Hall under their belts. They may not have won this ordinance issue, but their new participation may change a vision of downtown that has to deal with them from here on out. In the long run, this may be a game changing moment and the birth of new players: downtown culture creators. Again, I’m not trying to put too much on it, but it’s like what Desmond Tutu once said: “It is not just about having a seat at the table; it’s about helping to set the menu.”
Raj,
The fight was a joke. It didn’t change a thing. the grand vision for downtown is no bars and clubs. it will be a high rise retirement community. That is what city wants. They know that only Retires will be able to afford the high rise condos.
The retires do not want clubs.
This city is a joke.
I hope they win the battle soon before people just give up an leave town. All we’ll have then is a city of one million Pete Campbells and finfans. What will they bicker about then? “The money should go to repaving lawns!” “No, it should go towards hiring fifty thousand white cops!”
At least the SJNEC got the ordinance changed to some degree with the exemption clause for promoters if the venue will sign contract accepting all liability and responsibility. I wish we could have made more changed, but alas, no such luck.
I really hope the the entertainment sector continues to stay united and work with the city on future nightlife issues to ensure we are heard from the beginning.
As a delegate of the SJNEC, I was proud of the fact that the city worked with us, up to a point. There were some changes made to the ordinance, but the sad fact is that the last few meetings we had were less of an outreach and more of a defensive strategy on the part of the city.
They came to us with open arms, pleading for us to air our greivances for the sake of establishing “a fair and balanced ordinance everyone could be happy with” and instead used our concerns to create their 15 minute opening statement/laundry list of rebuttals, hilariously longer and more in depth than our allowed 2 minutes of faux-activism. I spoke in front of the council, and by the look on their faces I doubt they were even listening. By their unanimous vote, I KNOW they weren’t. Truthfully, by the inattentiveness of council and the quickness of their unanimous vote, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that the decision was already made around the water cooler a week prior.
It’s not a shock to me that our government can be two faced beasts, but it was an insult to all the time and effort we all put into the fight to have these same people who we put into power (i.e. give jobs) stare at their computer screens while we speak and then have the gall to tell us NOT to boycott or fight against the decision anymore.
“Just fall in line” seems to be the city’s motto. I guess it works for city council, since we saw hey they all voted the same while staring at their computer screens and wondering about dinner, but as someone on the fringe of our city’s “acceptable society” I can’t find myself in the role of a sheep.
But hey, there’s plenty of other cities to work in. And San Jose’s history of an abandoned ghost town downtown seems even more of a reality now than it’s envisioned future of Santana Row Clones.
Good luck San Jose, I hope you find the rich people willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to live in a downtown full of closed shops and nightclubs full of hipsters paying $30 to get in drunken fights while dressed nice.
Bravo.
Luck
oh, and ps. The Ambassador shooting the city claims caused most of this – NEVER actually had a promoter the night of the shooting. oops!
Brilliant job on capturing the situation during the two-minute public comment window.
The promoters were duped by poor leadership. They should have organized and had legal representation. Instead, they were divided, then conquered. That deal was already cut behind the scenes! OPEN YOUR EYES!
Bravo to a group of so called united Nightlife Entertainment leaders… Or should I say ’ the cool crowd’ that pretends to care about everyones needs but in reality like the city council had there own hidden agenda..
Sounds good, lets band together and pretend to oppose the city council. We are a bunch of united artists & promoters ( that supposedly can market and campaign to targeted demographics for there own events) who can not accomplish defeating a city ordinance.. What happened to the $$ raised supposedly to obtain legal representation..
WOW so hooray we have a clause that allows the venue owner to take responsibility… so how does the ordinance change anything with regards to holding promoters accountable..
So is it fair to say that now promoters have contracts with venues. You have to be kidding. What, promoters did not have contracts with venues before.. So really what has changed.. the city has a new way to make more money, promoters still use contracts, venues can opt to be responsible for events and there establishments, and the same promoters that have been throwing the ssame events year after year are still crying about something…
** OK fyi if these promoters (SJNLEC leaders) can really make a difference and oppose the city council, then they should be able to unite all of the thousands of people that over the years have paid to enter/attend there events..
San Jose city council (our elected officials) have found another revenue source. SJ Promoters will find other ways to supplement there lost income (haha if any) by charging it directly to the guests that attend there events..
Lets see where this will lead to over the next few months and years..
me