Instead of tarnishing our town with a mayoral recall, let’s put
our efforts in adjusting our elected officials compensation and
reminding them they are obligated to the voters.
GUEST VIEWS
By Dan Stevens
I have been a resident of Gilroy for more than 30 years and our current political situation is a mess. Certainly our current budgetary situation does not provide for residents to take on a $400,000 mayoral recall, but certainly we must respect the spirit and anger that has brought this issue forward.
I also do not believe the police issue is the sole issue causing frustration. Frankly, these are tough times, they require strong and steady leadership and the mayor may simply not be equipped for the job to guide us to the other side. Mark Zappa’s viewpoint has been limited and extreme. There have been some good things this Council has done. I believe holding Gilroy Gardens, despite the short-term cost, was the right decision for the long run. Mark Zappa does not. But Mr. Zappa has also missed the boat on other areas where this current Council has failed.
Council should check their personal agendas and motives at the door, act respectfully of all people they serve, including their peers and demonstrate transparency in their decision making process such that even if you disagree with a final decision, you respect the outcome and spirit in which it was made.
Frankly, the actions of the Council, led by our mayor have been alarming. Wisdom and common sense seem to have been abandoned for personal agendas and recent meetings remind me more of playground fighting rather than constructive professional meetings. I have been appalled to watch the mayor use valuable Council time and express his personal views on how he was treated in the newspaper or tell stories of trying to find out when the city offices were open prior to the Fourth of July holiday. He is the mayor and should know these things. If it’s that hard for him, imagine how hard it is for regular Gilroy folks!
And while nobody should discount the personal sacrifices made by our elected officials, it should be noted that we pay Council for their time and they receive very large healthcare packages. Health care cost has been a key issue. For many residents it is not available. It is not a capped amount for the Council and the payments seem excessive. Compensation should be fair, consistent with similar cities and paid the same to all members regardless of their personal healthcare needs. Pay a set compensation schedule and make it the same for all members and eliminate healthcare from the package.
What has disturbed me the most, however, is the behavior of the mayor and those Council members who seem to blindly support the mayor’s positions. We elect Council to have different viewpoints, inject their wisdom and not just endorse the mayor. Respectful disagreements are a valuable part of politics. Perhaps local voters should have paid attention to the nasty behaviors that emerged during recent elections. People who behave badly do not often change once in office.
I want to know how Council members will address public safety, growth and guide us through difficult budgets and not continue to see our elected officials make decisions purely based on personal relationships with local celebrities and businesses or punitively against certain groups. I am further disturbed by information that is not in our newspaper, particularly that our local mayor not only takes trips to Portugal, but has built a large home there where he plans to retire sooner than later. I have observed the mayor making comments to the effect that he has only three years left and since there are no re-election plans here, does not feel a strong obligation with regard to voter scrutiny. That leaves room for some scary decision making in the next three years.
Perhaps evidence that this is problematic can be seen in recent decisions such as the one to accommodate a single landowner and change our General Plan and allow residential development out of order. I have had to jump through far more hoops to get a deck added on an existing home!
Of great concern, too, is that I have been told that several Council members find healthcare payments as a main motive for serving. That should never be a motivating factor in our local government.
Gilroy is becoming a sad place, the bonds that tie us are breaking, gangs are winning on our streets, our schools are struggling and our local residents are suffering on many levels. As our house values continue to shrink, people must be asking why they continue to stay. The paper did a story recently on pay in surrounding cities. Morgan Hill began about the same size as Gilroy with similar issues. They have done a better job. They have carefully allotted thoughtful development, they have contained gang violence, they have a warm and welcoming downtown that is used and occupied and boasts successful businesses. They also pay their elected officials far less than we do.
Let’s pay for what we get. Instead of tarnishing our town with a mayoral recall, let’s put our efforts in adjusting our elected officials compensation and reminding them they are obligated to the voters. If they won’t vote to eliminate their own healthcare benefits, we should put our efforts there.
Perhaps the citizens should vote to equalize and cap compensation packages of our local officials. The money we save could fund an additional police officer and will establish a future for our government that is more stable and fair. Then perhaps people will serve for the right reasons and do the right thing.
Guest columnist Dan Stevens is a longtime Gilroy
resident. Anyone interested in writing a guest column should contact Editor Mark Derry at ed****@****ic.com
