By Donald H. Harrison
SAN DIEGO– The Union-Tribune reported on Saturday morning that according to its poll 59 percent of the people of San Diego want Mayor Bob Filner to resign. And, if he doesn’t resign, according to the same poll, nearly two-thirds of those who want him to resign–74 percent–want him to be recalled.
That seems to indicate that at least 26 percent of those calling for his resignation would like to avoid the expenses and animus of a recall election, but wouldn’t mind if the mayor, by quitting, made his problems go away.
That there is a lot of animus against the mayor has been clear for a very long time, and no one can deny that his truculent style is an important reason for that. Instead of being collaborative at City Hall, he has been combative and high-handed. He has been combative with City Attorney Jan Goldsmith; he has been at odds with the City Council, a majority of whose nine members now say he should quit. These are Democratic members Todd Gloria, the current president of the council, and David Alvarez, and Republican members Kevin Faulconer, Lorie Zapf and Scott Sherman.
Filner also has fought hoteliers, builders, the Union-Tribune, and almost every other powerful interest in the city. Clearly, a lot of people would be relieved if Filner would just disappear.
I have expressed again and again the strong exception I take to the way foes are trying to railroad Filner out of office, without bringing any facts forward, without even telling the voters what the mayor’s alleged misdeeds were. On the issue of whether sexual harassment occurred–and whether Filner therefore deserves to be removed from office–I have no opinion. I am neutral. How could I be otherwise? Up to now, nobody has been willing to share the facts publicly. It has all been one big secret.
Some say, well all these important people, some of whom were Filner’s allies, wouldn’t demand his resignation, if the allegations weren’t true. Maybe that’s true, maybe it is not. Regardless, that is not the test that our society prescribes when allegations are made of serious wrongdoing.
If whatever the mayor supposedly did was against the law, then we have a justice system to take care of that. Prosecutors gather their information, charges are leveled, and the defendant–under the rules of evidence– has his day in court. We assume that the defendant is innocent until proven guilty, and not the other way around. The defendant gets to face his accusers in an arena that deals with evidence, not vendettas. A jury, without any vested interest in the outcome of the case, deliberates. And then we get a fair and impartial verdict.
If there is a sufficient case against the mayor to bring him up on charges, then so be it. Let’s move this controversy to the court system, where accusations of wrong-doing belong.
I ask my fellow San Diegans — the 59 percent of you who now want Mayor Filner out of office– in fairness to Mayor Filner, and, in fairness to our democratic system of government, what do you really know? How do you know that the campaign against him doesn’t have some other ulterior political purpose? Courts don’t accept hearsay evidence, yet that is all we’ve received.
As to whether Filner could continue to serve as mayor while all this might be going on, we have seen other politicians under tremendous pressure continue to operate effectively. There was Ronald Reagan during the Iran-Contra scandals. Gerald Ford in the furor over his pardon of Richard Nixon. Bill Clinton in the aftermath of his affair with Monica Lewinsky.
On the other hand, we also have seen politicians fold under the pressure. Richard Nixon resigned when it was clear that he would be impeached. Locally, Dick Murphy resigned as mayor when he realized that he was unable to deal effectively with the city’s mounting financial crisis.
There is no fixed rule, no way of knowing, how a person will perform under great pressure.
Now, we are hearing that the alleged victims haven’t come forward because to do so would inevitably result in their re-victimization.
I’m sorry, if someone believes that the highest elected official in our city has done something so terrible that it warrants his being forced out of office, that person ought to have the courage to stand up and give an account of what happened. If someone was wronged, or harassed, there is no shame in saying so.
I believe the alleged victims should come forward and with quiet dignity relate what happened. And, if that finally is what happens in San Diego, Mayor Filner should be required to answer those allegations–whatever they may be–in a proper forum, with due concern for the rights of all involved.
*
Harrison is editor of San Diego Jewish World. He may be contacted at donald.harrison@sdjewishworld.com
Filner’s nearest and dearest, politically, to say nothing of his erstwhile betrothed, have deserted him for reasons that can be reasonably implied, if not stated explicitly. He cant keep the very persons he needs to run his office. He is behaving just as he has behaved for the past 25 or so years and nothing is apt to change that. It does not appear that he has committed an impeachable offense but he should resign. It is tragic, but if he Is unable to understand his weaknesses and cannot comprehend what the remainder of his term will be like for the city and for himself, then he is certifiably mentally unbalanced. He should resign. I am unalterably opposed to Recall. The potential consequences of such an event are more risky than retaining Filner for the balance of his term.
As you well know Don, I am bias anyway so if Filner leaves let’s hope the republicans retake the mayor’s office.
Anyhow, I think that San Diego has had a history of mayors that shame our city so Mayor Filner is no exception. He ought to be found guilty first then from there, a “political decision” can be made. As a proud member of San Diego, I hold the opinion that we should leave Filner alone, yet offer our prayers that he seeks help.