April 15, 2004

City’s nod to same-sex marriage stirs concerns by church leaders, others

By Shari Kaplan
Staff Writer

When smoke and rumblings emanate from a volcanic crater, it may simply be letting off steam —or it may be preparing to erupt. How much San Jose has in common with a volcano remains to be seen, but the rumblings generated by a controversial March 9 City Council decision cannot be ignored.

While San Jose does not issue same-sex marriage licenses, last month Mayor Ron Gonzales and the City Council affirmed the validity of same-sex marriages that took place elsewhere and voted to provide health benefits to the same-sex partners of all interested city employees.

Conservatives concerned
This doesn’t sit well with the pastors of several of San Jose’s large Evangelical churches, including Santa Teresa’s Family Community Church (FCC) and South Valley Christian Church (SVCC), along with Cathedral of Faith and Jubilee Christian Center.

The pastors are concerned, according to FCC’s Rev. Bill Buchholz, that by validating same-sex marriages before the legal system does, Gonzales and the council are thumbing their collective noses as California’s Proposition 22.

Sometimes called the Knight Initiative, Prop 22 passed in 2000 and amended state law to dictate that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Not only do the pastors want the City Council to rescind its action, but they are also considering a recall of Gonzales.

“If the Mayor wants the situation to be resolved, we told him he must figure out with the Council how to rescind the March 9 decision, or at least suspend it, until it [the same-sex issue] has thoroughly worked its way through the court system,” Buchholz said.

Referring to an April 2 meeting with Gonzales and several San Jose pastors that also included Larry Pegram, a SVCC congregant who served two terms on the City Council in the 1970s. “There was a good dialogue; the Mayor was very forthright and addressed the idea of a recall very candidly,” Buchholz said.

“The City of San Jose would be derelict if it continued to posture itself with an illegal action,” he added. Since there is currently no legal California recognition of same-sex marriage, then such marriages are not legally admissible. Likewise, he says city validation of such marriages is a “violation of Prop. 22 and the will of the people of San Jose.”

The pastors’ group is responding to the March 9 action in several ways. First it held a large Palm Sunday rally, which included worship and singing, at San Jose’s Calvary Chapel in support of traditional marriage. That was organized by the Values Advocacy Council, a San Jose-based nonprofit that supports biblical and family values through community and political activism. The rally featured a keynote speech by Tony Perkins of the Family

Research Council, a national faith-based organization, along with comments by several San Jose pastors, including Buchholz, SVCC’s Rev. Dave Sawkins and Jubilee’s Rev. Dick Bernal.

Possible Mayoral recall
A further-reaching response is the group’s consideration of recalling Gonzales. In a statement published April 10 in the San Jose Mercury News, Pegram went public with the fact that the mayoral stance on same-sex marriage is not the only reason his group seeks to oust Gonzales, but the catalyst. Other grievances also exist, including Gonzales’s alleged political “slush fund,” a lessening of jobs available citywide and the high costs of the new City Hall.

The Times was on deadline when this statement was published. In an earlier conversation with The Times, Pegram said that Sacramento-based political consultant Sal Rousso—hired for about $40,000, raised by local opponents of same-sex marriage—has begun surveying San Jose residents to see how they feel about same-sex marriage and Gonzales’s performance as a whole.

“We’re in the information-gathering stage and moving along judiciously. We’ve received some indications from various constituencies of dissatisfaction toward the Mayor and the City Council,” Pegram said.

The ball is in the Mayor’s court
If the Mayor and Council do not rescind the March 9 decision, we will move forward judiciously. This is an issue that will not die,” Pegram continued. “Our resolve is extremely strong. It’s not a microwave process; it’s a slow bake. We’re building our foundation, gathering our information and are ready to move ahead.”
The Mayor speaks

In a telephone interview last week, Gonzales described the April 2 meeting as constructive, said he has great respect for the leaders with whom he met and said the meeting was valuable in that it gave all parties a chance to communicate in person.
“My purpose at the meeting was to hear the solutions they felt were workable. I indicated that I would get back to them soon,” Gonzales said. “I didn’t commit to any action at that time. We’re still reviewing all their comments and the information presented.”

“I think all of us are focused on one thing: keeping San Jose moving in a positive direction. I think the majority of the pastors are concerned with the effects of a recall; it would be divisive, expensive and disruptive to the city,” said Gonzales, who nonetheless is confident he can weather the storm if it comes.

“I take my job very seriously, and I take the recall very seriously as well. I’m ready to campaign hard, and I am ready, willing and able to defend my position as Mayor of San Jose,” he said.

Gonzales is also serious about extending health benefits to the spouses and children of all city employees, even if those individuals are part of an employee’s family through a same-sex union.

“I hope the public will be open-minded and see that in the long run, this will benefit San Jose,” he said. “I think the majority of the people of San Jose want it to be known as being a progressive city where all people are accepted, no matter what their race, religion or sexual orientation is.”