Well we must be doing something right. Last week the business and Rotary members were angry that I criticized them for their silence on assorted ethics issues at City Hall. I also said then that Big Labors’ stubborn refusal to break with Terry Gregory until the key practically turned in the jailhouse door, was an act of political cowardice. Pure partisanship had trumped the interests of the people of San Jose.
Last Friday, the ethically mute leader of the South Bay Labor Council, Gregory apologist, Phaedra Ellis-Lamkin struck back and accused me of resenting “working people” getting power.
Hmmmm. Why the amateurish personal attack? They must be worried that the curtain is being pulled aside.
In my public career I almost always had labor’s support, except when they asked me to do something I considered bad for the City, like dumping a non-union low bidder. Overall, I admire the diligence and commitment that so many union members have put into improving our City; I salute their electoral effectiveness.
I would assume the labor bosses’ vehemence comes from inexperience and the “us and them” politics we see in Washington or Sacramento. To try and presume that their support for Terry Gregory, such a poor example of a public servant, is based on his “peoples’ first agenda,” seems to be the last refuse of a bankrupt group of insider politicians.
I have not noticed the South Bay Labor Council aligned with neighborhood groups, environmentalists or reformers. On the contrary, as the quality of life in San Jose diminished, they have aligned themselves with lobbyists, development interests, and the gambling cartel in our City. They were even fined in recent years by the Fair Political Practices Commission for hiding from the public last minute expenditures to fund a hit piece.
In their world, the end is getting to justify the unscrupulous, ah, the means. It is not about labor versus business or liberal versus conservative. It is now seems to be ethics verses corruption. They should no longer stand on the wrong side.
Has Phaedra Ellis-Lamkin ever held a real full-time job other than working for a union? Just wondering.
Geez….you’d think that nothing good is going on in SJ if you only read this blog. See the attached link for a different perspective.
http://www.sacbee.com/content/sports/story/12062094p-12932266c.html
Yes, I did support it.
If the business, Rotary, and union members are angry about your comments tell them to present their case here on your website for all of us to read. Since we have already heard the Rotary club was too busy discussing signs, I would really like to hear from Phaedra Ellis-Lamkin how you resent working people gaining power.
While we are at it, I would also like to hear from Chuck Reed why he thinks the investigation into the Cisco fiasco should end now that we are starting to see the city manager was in the middle of this mess.
I am always suspicious of people who make comments and then hide behind false names such as “Truth” or “Steve.” Especially when there is no way to directly communicate with a false address!
Unless, of course, they are city employees and are scared for their jobs!
Jerry
To: Ed Flabeets
Phaedra started at SBLC/WPUSA as an intern in college and has remained there ever since.
When she first started working for SBLC/WPUSA, she went into Amy Dean’s office and told her “I want to be just like you”. I think she succeeded.
And hopefully she will be gone just like Amy Dean—-but not with a 6.5 million dollar home.
Dear Truth – thanks for the link about good news on sports in San Jose. I guess it “was” a good idea to build HP Pavilion: I am sure you supported it in ‘88.
San Jose is a wonderful City. It deserves the best in leadership. I want it improved. TMcE
Thanks. Just so I understand the concern.
I thought you might like this quote—it explains both the Chamber, Labor, Democrats, Republicans, and Cortese’s 60+ supporters who defended his call for an election in district 7.
“Your base in politics is made up on the people who are with you even when you are wrong.” Barney Frank
I guess Gregory’s base sunk below 60 – too bad it took the DA to reduce it. I would hope ethics/responsibility might have done so. At one time in San Jose, it would have.
TMcE
I am assuming you are talking about Wiess Bros. and the downtown transit mall as the non-union low bidder you supported. Well he was signatory to the Steel Worket union and we opposed Wiess becouse he was unqualifyed contractor which was proven when he lost his contractor licence and was guilty of steeling the workers penion funds. He also cost the city millions in back charges and I do mean MILLIONS. Great low bidder and you do get what you pay for. Labor was right.
John – nice to hear from you. I thought you had moved to Brazil. I was speaking of low bidders in general, though your generous description of Weiss makes it seem he
might fit right into San Jose today. TMcE
Rich
It is not animosity but concern. I have criticized the silence of business ‘and’ labor. Labor is to be commended for hard work & dedication. But there is a simple rule in democracy: power must have responsibility. Labor should have shown that attribute in the Gregory affair. He was their candidate. This is not complicated, Rich, but it takes some courage that we have not seen in local politics lately. Business should take note and wake up also. TMcE
Sorry if I missed something, but why the animosity toward Phaedra and the Labor Council?
What, exactly, have I missed? Is their support of Gregory worse than the Chamber’s support of Voss? Both seem ethically challenged to me. Yet, painful as it was, they withdrew their support of Gregory. Had they not done so, he probably would have fought for his job.
As far as issues go, which Labor policies are so egregious that they threaten San Jose?
I am not trying to be disingenious, I would never question Tom’s dedication to San Jose, his commitment to ethics (though I would disagree on some tactics), and I have never considered him anti-labor.
I also know Phaedra is dedicated to San Jose, hardworking, honest and driven. People may disagree with the some labor policies, but their intentions are honorable.
Last, when business and labor work together, there is almost nothing that can’t be accomplished. Does anybody really want BART to San Jose?
I just don’t understand what the attacks are about. Please enlighten me.
It is so obvious that all the unions are out for is a perpetual job with perpetual benefits. Unions had there place in the past protecting workers from harm and mistreatment. They were brave and fearless in their efforts to help working people abused by ruthless bosses, who cared nothing about people but only profit. It is now the job of unions to elect officals who only want to support them blindly whether right or wrong. They threat goverment as their own savings account and the people be dammed. If they were interested in anything but blind support they would drop a lot more candidates and elected officals.
Rich,
Regarding your Barney Frank quote let me give you one of my own: I’d rather do the right thing and lose my base than do the wrong thing and keep it. I know that kind of thinking drives political consultants crazy but on the other hand it is the kind of debate that keeps ethicists fully employed. I think Tom’s point may be in part that if business and labor (and politicians) constantly ascribed to that principle there would be a lot less differences and animosity in the first place. Granted, it may be easier said than done, but we have to start finding some common ground somewhere—ethics and fair play is as good a place as anywhere to start the discussion.
Dave,
I always advise my clients to do the “right thing”, then I can help make it politically correct. That’s the real job of a political consultant.
Too often elected officials choose to be temporarily popular or to act out of fear. Too often their consultants advise them this is the best course of action.
Profiles in Courage was not written about winners. Those individuals did the right thing and lost their political positions as a result, but history records their deeds.
Second, I believe, we all share the same goals, Business and Labor, Democrats and Republicans. We all want a good economy, a clean environment, education for our children and ethical leaders. Politics is about the tactics for getting there and different philosophies provide different results.
Education of the electorate is the key. They need more information, not less. They need to participate, not simply gripe and we need a republic that works, not a democracy that creates anarchy. This means the voters don’t always get to make th decision.
Pandering to them only excerbates the problem. The ethics issue, for instance, is a good one. Simply put, there are too many laws. All were created with good intentions, but neither you or any of your colleagues will escape an ethics violation at some point in your career. The local laws on top of the Federal and State Laws make it impossible for anyone to be ethical.
The result is that the collective we, political consultants, do not run campaigns on issues, but why the other guy is worse than our guy.
But what do the newspapers and reformists call for? More ethics laws. It is time we got rid of laws, it time we downsized the bureaucracies, agencies and government entities themselves.
Why does the City have so many assistant City Managers?
Real reform will take more than ethical behavior. I will take bold, action. The people, I believe, are ready and will respond. I am waiting for a candidate to come to me and say, “I will work to abolish laws and to abolish wasteful government .” That person will be very unpopular with the bureaucrats, but will win in a landslide with the people.
Finally, ethical behavior cannot be legislated. However, leadership can be held accountable, but only if the people do their part in our democratic republic.
P.S. This type of advice would usually cost you $50 thousand at a minimum. You got it for free.
I am new to this blog. Was Cortese’s cheap shot typical? Did Robinson hurt him? Does Cortese have something of value to add?
Rich-I take it you charge by the word.
Dave,
I apologize. I, more than anybody, know politics must always be reduced to a 5 second sound-bite:
Stop pandering and do the right thing!
Hope it wasn’t too long for you.
Geez Rich-lighten up! After I read the thoughtful content of your blog I got a chuckle out of your P.S. (in #17 above) and thought I’d play along and add a bit more humor…
Dave,
I wasn’t offended, I was just giving you the business. . .
It’s important to keep the conversation light—even or especially when we disagree.
Both Tom and John have a tremendous sense of humor—this board has been a lot of fun so far.
At least for me.