That’s what we’re all hoping to be able to do, but it looks like we won’t get the chance. Barry Witt has a story in the Mercury News about the fate of the documents.
Something that is public is the amount spent by this city and others around the bay area on transportation for city officials and workers. Dan Reed has a rundown.
Other stories around San Jose this week:
Ciy Raises loan limits for teachers buying homes… By Michele Leung
Brazilian martial art a moving experience… By Mary Gottschalk
Italian family festa 25 years strong… By Mary Gottschalk
Safe and Sound, Hurrican Katrina victims find safety in Almaden… By Mayra Flores De Marcotte
Good weather keeps new library on schedule… By Michele Leung
Art selected for library and community center showcases Almaden’s culture… By Sarah Holcomb
“I have nothing to hide…except the truth.” Gonzo 2005
Catch 22: The City Council is The City Attorney’s client. There is a claim of attorney client privilege. Who knows if it’s legitimate? So all these bozos need to do is send something to Mr. Doyle and he clams up—no matter how deleterious it is to the people.
But isn’t the City Council supposed to serve the public?
Public business should be public, no matter what it is—personnel matters, and all the other exceptions to The Ralph Brown Act should be thrown out.
What is it about the word “SERVANT” in the title “public servant” that they don’t understand? In their view, the public serves them, when it should be the other way around. The public is the master.
Time for another Boston Tea Party, or what?
I noticed recently that some cities elect their attorney. With all of Rick Doyle’s questionable decisions, it is time to make the city attorney an elected position in San Jose?
How sad to have to even consider a change to an elected city attorney; tantamount to acknowledging that the tenets of professionalism are no match for the harsh realities of our decomposing political system. To have to surrender something that we have learned to treasure, a faith in the integrity and political autonomy of our top-level servants, only to then have to subject ourselves to even more of the skulduggery of local kingmakers would be a very sad day for this city. I can already envision the raid on city coffers should the local bar gets its dupe into office.
In exchange for the authority bestowed upon him by the people, the public servant must deliver more than skill and effort: he must protect the public from others with authority, and do it in a clear, convincing manner. It is what our system depends upon. It is the public servant’s sworn duty.
Our city attorney has not done his duty; and worse, he’s caused the citizens who pay his salary to now wonder how to protect themselves from those who will hold his office in the future. And that, folks, is the ultimate in unacceptable performance evaluations.
We elect the District Attorney who prosecutes criminal cases. FinFan—would you rather he be appointed by the County Board of Supervisors?
By whatever process we acquire a City Attorney, he needs to understand that although the City Council is technically his client, he really needs to serve the needs of the people. Thus, if there are inherent conflicts of interest when the governing body—council & mayor—become lazy and ineffectual like the council, or mendacious like the mayor and his staff.
JMO,
I see a significant difference: the city attorney operates in the bowels of the bureaucracy—largely invisible to the voters, while the district attorney operates in the very public criminal justice system. Case in point: were it not for the efforts of the Grand Jury, even an interested citizen would know nothing of how Mr. Doyle does his job, let alone question his conduct in the NorCal matter. Nor would the average voter have a clue as to the skills and qualities necessary for the job. Not so with the DA; interested citizens know how they feel about crime and what they want in a prosecutor. They deserve the right to elect the person that best represents their values.
Do I think the current system is working perfectly? Obviously not. But the fault lies with us, not the system. By allowing our elected officials to staff the top positions in government with lap dogs we’ve set ourselves up to suffer the consequences of unhampered shenanigans, gross incompetence, and self-serving dereliction of duty. Sadly, this has not gone unnoticed in public service. The next generation of administrators is out there working its way up—lap dogs in training, if you will; busy shedding personal integrity and professional pride, eager to step into those high-paying, top jobs and give us exactly what we deserve.
Good points, finfan.