CA: City Hall probe misses target: incompetence (San Jose's 'Taj Gonzales')

Mercury News ^ | 9/2/04 | Scott Herhold

[NormsRevenge]

The legal dogs of war were loosed this week on San Jose's new City Hall, the Taj Gonzales, snarling over how and when city officials lied on costs or got too chummy with Cisco.

It began Monday when the McManis, Faulkner & Morgan law firm revived a lawsuit brought by the late Al Ruffo to control the Taj's costs.

It continued Tuesday when the city council, led by the mayor himself, requested a criminal probe by District Attorney George Kennedy.

We should rejoice, right? The lawyers will bring us closer to knowing the building's real costs and the city's questionable pact with Cisco, won't they? Shouldn't we hail the new era of truth by dancing around the Taj's rotunda on Santa Clara Street?

Well, no.

Neither of these moves is anything for real cheer. The lawsuit is a formidably expensive way of uncovering the truth. And the district attorney's investigation won't hasten our understanding of the full scope of municipal idiocy.

Ruffo redux

Begin with the Ruffo lawsuit. In a complicated settlement two years ago, city officials agreed to set guidelines to make sure the Taj was complying with Measure I, which forbade construction if the new City Hall diverted tax dollars from other services.

There's no question city officials were less than candid about the Taj's real costs, which are now $388 million and growing. The McManis firm has plenty of ammunition.