December 16, 2004

City Council close to censure

Damaging testimony all but buries one
of it’s own

By Kymberli W. Brady
Staff Writer

Universal Studios couldn’t have scripted a television drama better than the events that unfurled this week in City Council chambers, as sworn testimony from several high-profile witnesses lent disturbing credibility to serious accusations of illegal and unethical conduct by Councilmember Terry Gregory.

Members of the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Ethics will decide whether to censure Councilmember Terry Gregory on Friday. Photo by Kymberli Brady.

Gregory has been the subject of scrutiny for several months. Mounting allegations prompted an investigation by the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Ethics into purported misgivings about Gregory’s abuse of power by illegally accepting or pressuring local businesses into free meals, sporting events, premium wines, contributions for his as well as Nancy Pyle’s campaign and donations for District 7 clean-up events. The four-member panel has called for a special session of the council Friday to consider censuring Gregory, the highest punishment that the council can bestow on a fellow member.

“The allegations are bad, but the facts are worse,” admitted council member Chuck Reed.

Although Gregory didn’t issue direct threats, his former Chief of Staff Craig Mann testified that he didn’t have to.

“You can nuance language,” he explained. “There were no direct ‘if you don’t’ threats, but the message was embedded in the conversations.”

Mann, who filed a wrongful termination claim against Gregory, recalled meetings where attempts were made to pressure representatives of Costco and Walmart into contributions for District 7. Addition-ally, a General Electric [GE] land use amendment request died with the Planning Commission because GE refused to allow housing on industrial property that they wanted to develop for commercial use. Apparently, GE didn’t want to take any chances that the site would create another “Erin Brocovich” scenario.

The most addressed issue surrounded Gregory’s relationship with Tropicana Shopping Center owner Dennis Fong, whose testimony left little doubt as to the seriousness of the allegations.

Fong admitted that he had picked up the tab for six dinners in 2003 and 2004, along with baseball tickets, premium wine and campaign contributions valued at up to $5,000. But he stunned the committee when he testified that Gregory asked him to lie if questioned by the district attorney or reporters by saying he paid his portion of the dinners through tips left on the table.

Fong also stated that he was heavily pressured by Gregory to collect campaign contributions from Tropicana merchants for Nancy Pyle, even though the merchants publicly endorsed Rich De La Rosa—considered Tropicana “family”—for the District 10 City Council seat.

Tropicana Shopping Center owner Dennis Fong’s testimony left little doubt as to the seriousness of the allegations against Gregory. Photo by Kymberli Brady.

“He did that on his own, and it was certainly done without my knowledge,” argued Pyle. “It’s like the independent expenditures, you don’t have control of what people do out there. I had no knowledge of that going on and no buy in, that’s for sure. I wouldn’t have the audacity to do that.”

After a third request by Gregory, alluding to it as “insurance in case Nancy wins,” Fong begrudgingly collected $1,000 in campaign contributions for Pyle. These were in the form of four $250 checks from Tropicana Merchants, but Fong admits he had tenants, vendors and family members write the checks.

“None of us wanted to use our names because we felt it hypocritical,” Fong said. “He asked for a lot more—$3,000 and I turned him down twice. We thought he was joking—even Nancy wouldn’t do that. But he said to consider it insurance in case Nancy won. It was insulting.”

De La Rosa agrees there’s nothing wrong with Gregory soliciting funds from Fong, but says the ethics committee is missing a major point.

“What was wrong was that he was asking for it from a position of power representing the city and negotiating a settlement with the Tropicana,” he says. “He was doing it from a point of coercion. He even made the statement to Fong. Ethically whether its against the law or not, it’s wrong. I’m sure it is, I just need to take a closer look at it.

There are a lot of things wrong, and it starts with the people we elect into office.”

“I don’t know how close their relationship is,” added De La Rosa. “Certainly he was in support of her, but if I was her, I’d certainly separate myself real quick.”

According to David Vossbrink, Mayoral spokesman, censure constitutes a very formal, very serious reprimand.

However, the council does not have the authority to remove Gregory from office—only the voters can do that through a recall campaign, which according to San Jose State political Science Professor Terry Christianson is a distinct possibility, but a lengthy effort that requires thousands of signatures and could take close to a year.

“It says that this behavior is unacceptable,” Vossbrink adds.

If recalled, Gregory would be only the second council member ousted from office in San Jose history. District 8 Councilmem-ber Kathy Cole was removed in 1994 following a videotaped speech where she pulled at the sides of her eyes to portray Asians. Thirty years earlier, four council members narrowly escaped a joint recall effort.

On Tuesday, Vice Mayor Pat Dando said testimony heard on Monday provided them with more than they needed to push for the censorship hearing and Gregory’s absence at the second council meeting in as many weeks didn’t help matters either.

With more than two-dozen code violations already, Gregory also faces fines up to $5,000 and possible criminal charges from the district attorney’s office. That investigation is still ongoing.