Police | District 6

A Model for Police Compensation in 2013

Note: This is Pierluigi Oliverio’s 300th Post:

Negotiations between the city of San Jose and the Police Officers Association continue to be contentious. (Photo by Thomas Hawk).

Our goals for law enforcement in San Jose must be based on need and the amount of tax revenues on hand. As Gov. Jerry Brown stated last month, “People want to have more childcare, they want to have more people locked up, they want to have more rehab, more, more, more. More judges, more courtrooms. We have to live within reasonable limits.”

San Jose has no choice but to operate in the world of reasonable limits, and it can only allocate money that is actually on hand. The city should not make new promises that cannot be kept.

Much has been said recently about law enforcement budgeting. A year ago, I wrote two articles suggesting a specific percentage of the budget should be allocated to police, thus allowing the police department to grow in keeping with future tax revenues and a growing population. Those previous posts can be found here and here.

Since this is not the case today, I must work within the current system.

One of the shared community goals is to increase the actual number of police officers. In addition, another shared community goal is for pension reform. In my opinion, these two objectives are inextricably linked. Back in 2010, I initiated, and a majority of the City Council supported, ballot Measure W. Voters in November 2010 approved Measure W by more than 72 percent. This gave us—for the first time ever in San Jose—the ability to create a new, lower cost pension plan for future employees.

Since the passage of Measure W, a second-tier pension system has been implemented for all new city employees, except for fire and police. Neither the fire nor the police unions agreed to accept a new retirement plan for future employees—again, we are talking about people who do not even work here yet. The restructured, lower-cost retirement plan for new hires is fundamental to financial stability, and it allows us to add new police officers over time as savings are achieved through pension reform.

Countless other government entities across our state and country have implemented a tiered pension system that includes public safety unions. In my view, a second tier must be in place for fire and police prior to any compensation discussions. Again, our Governor clearly agrees with this line of reasoning: “Pension reform can be hard to talk about,” he said. “In the long run, reform now means fewer demands for layoffs and less draconian measures in the future.”

When it comes to the present discussion on compensation, one option is to give all employees an ongoing raise. While an ongoing compensation increase may be ideal, there is no money to backfill it next fiscal year, which would then result in 100 percent pay cuts for some city employees—in other words, layoffs. Every 1-percent compensation increase to all city employees would cost $7.9 million per year. However, this assumes that all positions are equal in value, and are equal in terms of interest for recruitment purposes. I can guarantee that in any outcome achieved, no one will be happy since tax dollars are finite. Those who want, may not get; and those who get, may want more. Knowing this, I suggest an option for cash in hand now for those who enforce the Social Contract.

This proposal would function in the following manner: Each police officer would be given the option to select a scheduled redemption of their accrued benefit of up to $15,000 over 15 months, starting in the upcoming fiscal year. The $15,000 could be derived—by employee choice—from any of three accrued sources: comp time, sick leave or vacation time. These three accrued sources currently add up to over $50 million just for police officers alone, the majority of which is sick leave at approximately $36 million. This $50 million is recorded as an accounting liability and must be paid out when someone retires or resigns.

Paying a portion of this out now would reduce future payouts that would be even more costly in the future, as accrued benefits are typically earned at a lower pay scale but always paid out at the highest pay scale. This action would also enable a future council to have more money to fund city services. The $15,000 payout option would cost approximately $15.2 million if every police officer was to redeem the maximum, and would consume over half of the $22.5 million in one-time funds that are available.

There is also potential to add new police officers. On Tuesday, the council will take action on a $6.9 million reimbursement from the county on property tax recalculation. This one time windfall of money should go directly to hiring new police officers if, and only if, a new retirement plan is in place for the police union. This money could be used to “hire ahead,” which would front the cost of new officers being vetted to coincide with future vacancies as current officers retire or leave. Incidentally, $6.9 million is approximately the same amount of money the city pays to subsidize golf and the Hayes Mansion each year.

The fact is that each individual has their own economic situation, which may or may not include a variety of personal factors. Whatever the situation may be, it is impossible to examine each police officer’s household income and ensure that they are paid according to their needs. This option ultimately allows the individual to choose what is best. One individual may choose to redeem the maximum amount, while another may redeem half, while yet another may choose to not redeem at all, instead saving it up for a future potential payout. This option is based on individualism rather than collectivism.

With this spirit in mind, we acknowledge that individuals will pursue their own happiness, and, as a result, may seek employment elsewhere or a different vocation.

Also posted in Measure W, POA, Politics | Comments closed

How the Council Set Its Priorities

The San Jose City Council met last week to discuss and prioritize certain ordinances the city should pursue in the coming year. Creating an ordinance requires staff time from the department that the ordinance will affect and, as always, time from the City Attorney’s office. In many cases, outreach for ordinances must be done to garner resident and stakeholder input which takes time and staff facilitating the public meetings.

The city is unable to move forward with every ordinance on the “wish list” much like any other organization public or private. Therefore, councilmembers are asked to prioritize by selecting their top choices and see which of those match their council colleagues’ preferences. An ordinance moves forward if it gets six votes, and those that don’t get selected remain on the list for next time, which is approximately one year. The council selected their top choices twice and was able to prioritize seven ordinances out of 30, which include:

● Converting Hotels & Motels to affordable housing.
● Closing Medical Cannabis Collectives that do not pay Measure U tax.
● Restricting Tattoo parlors near K-12 schools.
● Development Agreement Policy (Negotiate deals for Economic Development).
● Restrict burning of wood in residential fireplaces.
● Ban any construction within 100 feet of creeks.
● Survey vacant buildings to house the homeless and more to be discussed in detail at council study session on October 29.

Some of the other ordinances that did not make it include: limiting new Wal-mart stores; a healthy eating initiative; neighborhood preservation; liquor store conversions; downtown bars that provide music pay to fund police officers.

We could have had an extended discussion on each topic, however, the items selected will come back to the council for further discussion at least two more times.

Two items I voted for that did not make the list were liquor store conversion and distinctive neighborhoods. The liquor store conversion ordinance would have the potential to eliminate existing liquor stores. Liquor stores do not really add a lot of value in my view, and I would prefer to see alcohol sold at grocery stores, because grocery stores offer a variety of food. Over time this would allow for more grocery stores to open, which is seen by many as an essential component of a neighborhood.

Neighborhoods of distinction would allow private property owners to create their own zoning based on the majority of the property owners’ desires. So, rather than government mandating regulation, it is a tool that allows private property owners to make their own decisions. For example, an Eichler neighborhood may decide that it wants to maintain Eichler architecture (Post and
Beam) for any new construction within its neighborhood boundary.

One item that made the list was converting existing hotels and motels into low income housing. This seems like it would be an interesting discussion and would have a wide variety of viewpoints, depending on how it would be potentially implemented. More to come on this topic, for sure.

Prioritizing and ranking priorities is important for organizations. However, in the case of government, certain priorities may not always represent what constituents want. The only real way is through the election process, because we have a representative democracy where we choose to elect an individual to vote on behalf of a larger population. Maybe someday residents will vote by electronic devices from their homes to select priorities midstream. Until then, it is what it is.

This week the Council will again take up the proposed Habitat Conservation Plan. Personally, I have found it curious that most of the emails I have received advocating for the implementation of the HCP are from residents outside of San Jose.

Also posted in Affordable Housing, City Council, Education, Medical Marijuana | Comments closed

Unshackle the Police Reserves

San Jose Municipal Code Section 8.12 authorizes the use of the PoliceReserves. Although the Reserves are available, the city is not utilizing their full potential. Use of the Reserve officers could offer valuable assistance to the city because they are fully sworn and have the authority of a regular officer under California Penal Code Section 832.6(a). Reserves have already completed the police academy and carry a gun.

If the city requested, the Reserves could potentially put an extra 20 officers on the street tomorrow. There are currently over 80 Reserves on the roster. If just 25 percent responded, the city would have 20 additional sworn officers available to patrol our neighborhoods. I realize that this may require negotiation with the labor union, and there is the possibility that the Police Officers Association may not be supportive. However, I am hopeful that the city and the POA could work collaboratively and bring forward a plan that would utilize the reserves; even if the plan were in the form of a pilot program and/or for a certain amount of time. For example, if the police union and the city could agree to use reserves for one year for specific purposes, etc. At the very least, we should try.

Another goal to strive towards is allowing the hiring of retired SJPD officers to work and be paid on an hourly basis—but not accruing further pension benefits. These retired SJPD officers could do background checks, burglary investigations, evidence gathering, get warrants, etc. for a one-year period.

Currently, the Chief of Police mandates that Reserves can only work alongside a regular officer, in the same car. Quite often the Reserve is not even counted as being in the car; thus, while there are physically two officers in the car, they are signed on as a one-man car and can only be dispatched as a one-man unit. If that practice were changed, we would see an immediate 800 hours per month of extra police patrol. Every Reserve must currently do a 10-hour shift on patrol each month (80 x 10 = 800). The Los Angeles Police Departmentallows Reserves to work by themselves or with other Reserves:
If the Reserves that are qualified to work as solo officers—about 80 of them are—were allowed to work on their own, they would add additional patrol cars on the streets; making a more visible police presence. I have heard that some current officers may resent the utilization of reserves and would rather not drive in the same car. If that is true, then the city and POA should allow Reserves to drive by themselves as most current officers do or allow Reserves to team up in the same car. If we allowed this, we might see many more Reserves volunteering more hours.
Reserves could also be utilized in other ways, too. For example, they could provide prisoner transport, be the second officer on a crime scene, assist in back-up when officers are sick, in court, etc. Having Reserves be part of the SJPD team would also lower overtime costs and provide time for police officers to take a vacation.

The Chief and the command staff know of the authority of the Reserves to backfill units because they already use the Reserves for the “Keith Kelly” Relief night (twice a year), as well as relief for the Police Olympics (one week a year). Therefore, there is a current and active precedent for using the Reserves for SJPD backup.
Although the Reserves work for free, they are allotted $1 per hour of work for their uniform allowance. Therefore, the city would incur an $800.00 per month fee for uniforms for the Reserve for a second voluntary shift per month.

San Jose needs to do the best we can today and we need to utilize all of our available resources now by allowing the Reserves to be visible patrolling San Jose neighborhoods. Utilizing Reserves and Retired SJPD is a cost effective way to provide law enforcement during this time with limited tax revenue.

Also posted in Culture, POA, Politics, Reform | Comments closed

Shucking Corn

Picture a corn field with a farmer shucking corn by hand. His focus is on shucking the corn and he does it very well. However, this farmer can only do so much in a day and thus is provided an opportunity to assemble farm equipment which will shuck more corn than present resources allow. However, to do so will mean that he will stop shucking the corn in the interim and consequently lose some portion of the crop to crows and rodents who will eat the corn if the farmer is not present.

Fortunately, our farmer has the money to pay a qualified retired farmer to assemble the farm equipment while he continues to shuc. He will soon have extra help in the field and thus be more productive. Sounds like a good plan. Our farmer is out in the field being vigilant of his farming duties, which includes warding off crows and rodents while the farm equipment is being assembled.

However, what would you say if the farmer was too proud and refused to allow a qualified retired farmer to help him assemble the farm equipment? Instead, he continues to farm the field himself into the evening hours, becoming tired and overworked. He may make a mistake while falling further behind. Hence, the farmer is never able to take advantage of augmenting his farming with the equipment and thus loses a large portion of the crops to crows and rodents.

Sounds silly to me. Why not accept qualified assistance so the farmer can do a better job in the field and remain vigilant in farming duties?

Well, this is currently the situation for our San Jose Police Department (SJPD). We have more qualified candidates who would like to join SJPD than open positions. The next step is to require a background check. Typically background checks are done by current SJPD, which means that 17 police officers are pulled from patrol. These police officers cannot be in two places at once and therefore this results in less police on patrol.

This topic among others was discussed at Public Safety committee two weeks ago. Police Chief Chris Moore would like to hire a private company to do the background checks rather than pulling police officers from patrolling the neighborhoods. The private company does this for other cities and they employ retired police officers to do much of the work and some of them are actually retired SJPD. However, the Police Officers Association objects to this and would rather pull police from patrol to do the background checks. I am told that on-duty police officers would do a better job since they have higher standards than retired police officers. However, the absence of 17 police officers from patrol creates a heavier burden on the remaining officers on patrol and less police presence on the streets.

I admire our San Jose police officers that work hard and return home safely after each shift. However, I also believe that law enforcement officials in other jurisdictions are good people as well. Retired law enforcement from the Sheriff’s office, Fremont and Mountain View, for example, are qualified to do background checks on prospective candidates for SJPD.

The idea of using retired police officers to do backgrounds triggers the process of union negotiations called meet and confer. I do not like the secrecy of meet and confer and would rather have negotiations public. In my view, the utilization of retirees should be something the city and police union could easily agree upon. I would prefer that this issue be discussed in public, rather than behind closed doors, to avoid hurt feelings and focus on more important matters.

I understand the need for union negotiations for wages and benefits. However, it does not look good when unions contest small items like assistance from retired officers or waste time and money defending people who should be terminated.

For example, the firefighters union filed a grievance for the right to have pornography in each fire station. In addition the firefighters union argued that termination of a fireman was too excessive when the civil service commission recommended he be terminated for sexual harassment of two female co-workers that included unsolicited massages, kisses, birthday spankings, and other inappropriate touching and banter. This is sad.

Making a mountain over a molehill creates negative PR for the union and in my view should be dropped since it hurts their credibility on negotiations that pertain to wages and benefits.

Also posted in Chris Moore, Culture, POA, Unions | Comments closed

Prioritizing Future City Spending

At the upcoming Aug. 7 City Council meeting, the discussion will focus on how to prioritize city spending IF revenues increase. So, in the example below, if revenues increase by $10 million—either by revenue growth or tax increase—this is how I think it should be spent by percentage. We will still be spending money on all of the city services included in the current budget, however, this example is for future potential revenue that is above the budget passed in June:

53% — Police $5.3M
15% — Road Paving $1.5M
5% — Planning, Building & Code Enforcement $500K
4% — Libraries $400K
2% — Tree Planting & Tree Trimming by Our City Forest $200K
2% — City Attorney’s Office $200K
2% — Information Technology $200K
2% — Pedestrian & Bicycle Safety-slowing cars down in neighborhoods $200K
3% — Pay down Debt $300K
2% — Save Money for Rainy Day Fund $200K
10% — Discretion of City Manager with Approval by Council to be Distributed to Human Resources, Finance, Public Works, Economic Development and/or a Need That Becomes Apparent in the Future $1M

There is no extra allocation for the Fire Dept., as Fire Chief William McDonald and staff have been successful in obtaining federal grants. Federal grants are great in the short term, but they will make it more difficult to allocate future funds to hiring police officers—which is why the majority of future revenue is allocated to police. In addition, I agree with the 2011 Santa Clara Civil Grand Jury that San Jose could utilize three firefighters on a fire engine like every other city in the county. The data in San Jose shows that calls for service are 4 percent structural fires and 96 percent non-fire calls, mostly medical. Any cost savings from realigning resources to match call data should go to police.

We need to allocate general fund dollars to the Planning Department rather than increasing and relying on fees. Development can be sped up this way, increasing our tax base and private sector employment base to fund city services. Funding of Code Enforcement to keep our city safe/looking good and also could bring in revenue by assessing fines to irresponsible property owners—especially apartments that are ill kept.

Adding some funding to libraries is good, but much more can be done with volunteers to keep the doors open than is done today.

One way to make San Jose more visually attractive is through more tree planting, including maintenance, which also has other positive environmental attributes. Putting 5 percent aside to pay down high interest debt and save for a rainy day fund is prudent. Allocating something, even though small for Information Technology, must be done to achieve efficiencies and put a down payment on upgrading the financial software of the city to enable more sharing of financial information with the public.

The city manager, as chief operating officer, needs flexibility in allocating funds where the council or general public may not be aware of the need today. Of course, any action should require Council approval, but 10 percent between so many different needs may not provide enough. The city manager will have to make do.

Also posted in City Council, City Manager, Firefighters, Libraries, Politics | Comments closed

The Social Contract

In society we have chosen to give up some of our liberty or ability to do anything we want for the the trade off of having more opportunity under law. If we do not like the rules of society than we can move away to a remote mountain and have more freedom, but one would give up certain benefits we have in society based on law.

The social contract is reinforced through friends, family, neighbors and those who interact with us in society. However, the enforcement is done primarily by our law enforcement personnel and internationally by our military.

Police are the ones responsible to respond when individuals choose to cause harm to others’ physical well being. Without adequate police, people may choose to break the contract, whether it be by comitting a robbery, an assault or murder. From my viewpoint, police maintain the social contract. No one else carries the authority to do so, and ideally, always in a fair manner, which carries a high level of responsibility. A high level of responsibility needs to be compensated well, in part to avoid temptations.

In comparison to other city departments, the police department is the only one that maintains order so those who are weak do not get picked on and those that are law abiding can go about their way. Would we want to return to the Wild West when gun fights occurred outside the saloon between individuals? Who would want to worry about those things today at Happy Hour? Police on patrol deter crime by simply being visible. This deterrence, I believe, leads to less incidents that require emergency services since the inhibition of criminal behavior means less use of the 911 system.

Government does have enforcement through regulation, but only law enforcement really enforces the regulation with the possible outcome of incarceration. It is a great power and must always be overseen by civilians who allow autonomy but expect fairness to be carried out.

Sadly, during these years of low revenue and escalating pension costs we must always consider what we can afford. There is a higher cost to being out of control. The social contract extends to our police, as that they must be diligent, be fair, and understand fiscal realities we face, and thus our ability to pay. At the same time, the policy makers must prioritize with the social contract in mind, not to be held hostage but to always put this in the balance with other choices.

Technology can help with enforcement by using surveillance cameras to ticket red-light runners, capture vandals on video to prosecute property crimes and use video footage for gathering evidence for prosecution of other types of crimes. The ability to maintain a civil society will evolve with technology. If we do not accept technology than we will fall short of our goals since we will never have police covering all places all the time.

In other matters: Tonight at City Hall there will be a showing of the documentary film, Bag It, with a discussion to follow with the Director of Environmental Services. The film presents the impact of plastics in society and their ramifications to our health. To learn more email tina.west@sanjoseca.gov

Congratulations to San Jose Made and San Jose Eats who brought what seemed to be a few thousand people to Downtown on Saturday afternoon for a pop-up retail and food truck event. The event also had the impact of filling every restaurant in San Pedro Square. A sign posted out front of one restaurant read: Closed-Out of Food.

Also posted in Politics | Comments closed

Police Chief Recruitment Community Meeting

I attended the first community meeting regarding the selection of the next San Jose Police Chief on Tuesday, Aug. 24 at the Roosevelt Community Center. Approximately 21 people attended. Attendees were divided into small groups to discuss five questions. I did not see any police officers however they may have been in attendance but remained anonymous.

Translation services were available in both Spanish and Vietnamese and printed material was provided in alternative languages as well. The cost for the recruiter is $26,000 to conduct the search including interviewing prospective candidates. San Jose is also paying up to $13,000 for travel expenses for all prospective candidate interviews since this is a national search. The goal is to pick a new Police Chief by the end of 2010.

In addition stakeholder outreach will be done with specific groups including La Raza, AACI (Asian Americans for Community Involvement) and PACT (People Acting in Community Together).

We have great internal candidates for Police Chief, like Captain Gary Kirby, Deputy Chief Diane Urban and Assistant Chief Chris Moore.

Here is some feedback given from all the tables that night:

What are the most important issues that you would like the new Police Chief to address?
Transparency; oversight; importance of the Independent Police Auditor; mental health issues; acknowledge good officers; more access to police records; police rotations should be longer to promote relationships between officers and residents; Gangs; racial profiling; police brutality; work with “immigrant” community.

What experience and track record should the new Police Chief have?
Experience managing a budget and under-budget; mediation skills; understands community view and police view; long history in one geography; trilingual or at least bilingual; history of promoting diverse officers; someone who changed perception of police from negative to positive; street-cop experience; manage complex organization; experience with a multi-cultural community; success in lowering crime however some thought statistics lie and this was unfair to use crime stats; track record of firing police.

Is there anything else you would like the City to consider when selecting the new Police Chief?
Should be pro-immigrant; skilled communicator; less on results more on initiatives; know the background/did their homework on issues facing San Jose; sustainable results over a period of time; at least five years of experience running large organization; speak in simple English not bureaucratic-speak; should recruit new police officers from the immigrant community; mail residents letters with the name of their local police officers and of course a sense of humor.

What are you willing to do or contribute to help the new Police Chief?
Attend more meetings; build bridges in the community; provide a report card on how new police chief is doing; pass out information; assist with outreach; be open minded.

The four groups provided feedback that essentially requires our next police chief to walk on water.

Does this feedback match your viewpoints?

There are three community meetings left:

Monday, Aug. 30, 7-9pm
San Jose City Hall Committee Rooms

Wednesday, Sept. 1, 6-8pm
West Valley Library
1243 San Tomas Aquino Rd

Thursday, Sept. 2, 6-8pm
Eastside Union High District Office
830 North Capitol Ave

You can give your feedback to these five questions via this email:info@tbcrecruiting.com

Or fill out an online Community-Police Chief survey by clicking this link.

Finally congratulations to the Mayor and RDA for locating another company in San Jose. Baxano, a medical device company, moved from Mountain View to San Jose. The CEO mentioned that one of the reasons for selecting San Jose was the proximity to our airport plus getting all of their permits in five days.

Also posted in Politics | Comments closed

Dear Chief Davis

I hope your weekend was enjoyable. I wanted to let you know that I believe that you have a very difficult job and I wanted to say thank you for your nearly 30 years of service to San Jose.

Managing an organization of approximately 1,400 people, public or private, is a challenge. It is impossible to make everyone happy internally or externally all of the time, or even some of the time. Overseeing a Police Department is one of the most difficult and demanding jobs one could have because of the high level of public scrutiny. As I have heard you say many times at the police academy graduations; wearing the police uniform puts the officer in the spotlight and all eyes are on the police officer. Our police are judged by everything from their words to the tone of their voice to body language.

With the retirement of Assistant Chief Katz there is a void in the police department leadership ranks. SJPD has the privilege of having many skilled men and women through the ranks who work hard and are committed to the safety of our residents. These dedicated police officers can and will rise to the level of leadership as needed. This is the benefit of having high standards of recruitment and vetting during the police academy and field training program. These high standards are a result of the investment of approximately $129,000 made by the city of San Jose into each new officer’s training and thus we risk a loss of approximately $10 million with the layoff of 80 of our most recently hired police officers.

As you know I have been on the Council for three years and in that time there has been challenging public discourse around SJPD. Each time SJPD needed an articulate speaker, for example on police records, or a technical speaker on the Bobby Burroughs police sub-station, and one person’s performance stands out. Again and again, whether at a council meeting, committee meeting, community or special meeting, I remember one person in particular always being there by your side or by himself defending, explaining and promoting the SJPD. This person was always on target and therefore respected by many officers from all backgrounds.

That was and is Capt. Gary Kirby. Time and time again Capt. Kirby rises to the occasion. Chief Davis, I believe you have a unique opportunity to promote from within a respected member of the SJPD. From my perspective Capt. Kirby is just missing the title of “Assistant Chief” since he already performs by your side and has lived up to the term, “got your back,” but the “back” to me refers to the entire police department.

Thank you for your consideration Chief Davis. Stay Safe.

Also posted in Politics, Rob Davis | Comments closed

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall

Last Wednesday night, the Public Safety committee held a special meeting regarding our police officers. The city manager began by sharing the amount of effort and outreach that has transpired the last few months with city initiatives with regards to our police department.

For the last two years, certain individuals have been lambasting our police force with charges of racial profiling and excessive force. Our police force has more than 400,000 engagements a year with San Jose residents and 99.8 percent of those have no complaints. The City of San Jose has an internal affairs department and an Independent Police Auditor (IPA) for complaints about the police department. With a city as large as ours, we are aware that complaints will no doubtfully happen. However, the complaints are few and far between, and that is something the city can be proud of.

Over the last two years I did not rush to judgment on condemning our police but rather listened to all points to view. As a Councilmember in a representative democracy I represent my entire district population and not just those who attend meetings as 99.5 percent of residents are not able to attend meetings or more so do not want to attend meetings.

Several members of the public spoke before the council and were generally supportive of the police. The speakers were San Jose residents from the West Side and the East Side who appreciated the efforts of our police force. One theme of change however was lengthening the rotation of a police officer from six months to some time longer so as to build even better relationships with residents.

The length of rotations is an issue that cannot be changed with a snap of the finger but rather a negotiation with the police union. I look forward to hearing more about the pros and cons on this specific matter.

Daniel Pham’s father spoke emotionally about his deceased son who suffered from mental illness and his loss. Dealing with the mentally ill even with specific training is very difficult as it is hard to reason with a delusional mind in a stressful situation. My friend from elementary school who suffered from mental illness committed suicide last year thus I have some understanding of the challenges with mental illness.

Another interesting point was raised by two different speakers. One was a Christian biker who was dressed sort of like a Hells Angel. He mentioned that his group had been stopped time to time by the police. He said if he was a police officer he would stop the bikers as well. He pointed out, however, that you should speak to a police officer the way you would like to be spoken to, like the Golden Rule.

As someone who grew up in San Jose I was always taught by immigrant parents to be polite to the police and I have been. It is only since being a Councilmember that I heard a person can verbally throw profanities at a police officer and that is acceptable. Well, it would not be acceptable with my Mom and Dad. An African American speaker who himself pointed out his large Afro said that he has been stopped by the police for decades both on the East Coast and the West Coast based on his appearance.

These two speakers got me thinking that is not just police stopping individuals but also the residents who call the police. Police respond to calls from our residents about suspicious activities and people. Therefore really all of San Jose is responsible. So, when you hear those that are critical of the police they are also critical at the character and prejudgements of our own San Jose residents and need to look in the mirror.

As far as our new IPA, I voted no along with Mayor Reed and Councilmember Constant. We had four well qualified candidates to choose from and I preferred another candidate. I do wish our new IPA great success for the 2.5 year term and beyond.

It is with deep sorrow that Chief Katz will be leaving/retiring from our police force. A straight shooter and a gentleman, he will be missed. My only request is that Captain Kirby please stay for the sake of stability and morale. I would make the same pitch to Chief Katz but I think it is too late.

Also posted in Politics | Comments closed

Here Come the Cuts

The City Manager will release the list of proposed cuts to balance the city budget today (March 29). These cuts are based on no concessions from any of the labor unions nor savings gained through outsourcing of janitorial services (among others) to save money.

Money saved from outsourcing could help pay for library hours or the aquatics program, for example. The question of concessions has been out there for months and could be included in the budget. Agreement would need to be reached in early April since layoff notices would start going out April 19. If concessions are made then some of these cuts could be avoided but in lieu of an agreement in hand here are some of the proposed/likely cuts.

As it stands now, 802 positions would be eliminated, of which 656 are filled positions, which closes the deficit of $118.2 million. In addition, there were services that were funded last year with one-time funds ($7,476,000), such as library hours, community centers and the SJPD horse-mounted unit, which will be going away as well, accounting for 77 filled positions.

Library:
Eliminate 104 positions to save $7.4 million in 2010-2011 and $7.9 million in 2011-2012. Neighborhood branch libraries would be open three days a week and the MLK Main library would reduce hours 12 percent. Delay opening of new Seven Trees and new Bascom libraries saves $2.3 million for library staffing. Does not include community center staffing costs.

Parks, Recreation & Neighborhood Services:
Eliminate 38 positions to save $4.3 million in 2010-2011 and $5 million in 2011-2012. Close smaller community centers.
Eliminate 12 positions, saving $836,000 in 2010-2011 and $854,000 in 2011-2012. Reduce maintenance staffing at parks; restrooms open only on weekends except in summer. Eliminate 10 park rangers, saving $634,000 in 2010-2011 and $848,000 in 2011-2012. Eliminate 24 positions, saving $630,000 in 2010-2011 and $637,000 in 2011-2012. Reduces aquatic program to only 2 pools in San Jose. Eliminate two positions in Code Enforcement, saving $302,000 in 2010-2011 and $323,000 in in 2011-2012.

Fire:
Eliminate 90 positions (88 are filled), saving $12 million in 2010-2011. 2011-2012 costs determined through binding arbitration. Reduce/suspend fire apparatus and fire fighters at station 30 Auzerais, Station 33 Communications Hill, Station 34 Las Plumas, Station 35 Poughkeepsie, Station 3 Martha Street and one other station yet to be identified.

Police:
Eliminate 160 positions (153 are filled), saving $25.5 in 2010-2011. 2011-2012 costs determined through binding arbitration. Reduce police patrols; eliminate funding for new officers; reduce Metro Unit; reduce Investigations unit; reduce Downtown services unit; delay opening of Police Substation; reduce Financial Crimes unit. Reduce the Crossing Guard program by 8.3 positions to save $354,000 in 2010-2011

Transportation:
Eliminate 12 positions for capital projects, including transit and bike/pedestrian projects. Saves $1.4 million in 2010-2011 and $1.6 million in 2011-2012. Eliminate 9 positions for Neighborhood Traffic Calming. No more traffic studies and no implementation of traffic calming tools. Saves $921,000 in 2010-2011 and $999,000 in 2011-2012. Eliminate five positions for residential street sealing. Saves $375,000 in 2010-2011 and $415,000 in 2011-2012.

Convention Center:
Eliminate 25 positions to save $1.9 million 2010-2011 and $2 million in 2011-2012.

This list is not comprehensive and may/will fluctuate based on final Council adoption of the budget in June.

Also posted in Budget, Parks, Unions | Comments closed

The Thinner Blue Line

Due to the structural budget deficit and the decline of tax revenues coming into the city, the January police academy has been postponed indefinitely. By postponing the academy the city saves money but risks neighborhood safety.

To be fair, it is a balancing act of what you would like to provide and what money you actually have on hand. However as I and others have pointed out, the city continues to spend money on items that are not in the city charter. In addition it does not require cuts in these “nice-to-have” items, as our core city departments have done in the past and must do again now. This is clearly problematic.

I think we all understand that a police force is expensive, but it is important to have fully vetted and qualified police candidates who provide safety and trust to San Jose residents. Other positions in our city may have an abundance of qualified candidates who apply, but when it comes to police there is a smaller pool with far fewer qualified applicants. It is a position that deserves to paid well, and within the limits of what taxpayers can afford. With that said, other city staff provide value to the organization and residents, but police put their life on the line at any given moment. One can be cynical about the old police doughnut-shop stereotype but in reality police are killed in this country every few days so there is inherent risk. (Click this link to see a report illustrating that fact.)

The problem with pushing out the new police academy class is that we are trying to keep up with retirements, not add additional police but just keep up. We have 80 officers retiring this year (some due to low morale) and the same number next year. It takes 18 months to get a police recruit out on the street. Our police force, much like our professional city staff, is starting to peak on retirements. There will be massive turnover in the next five to eight years for the entire city workforce.

This turnover is why 2nd Tier Pensions (benefits taxpayers can actually afford) for new hires is so important to do now. So by pushing out the academy the ratio of police to residents will decrease even more. What does that mean to you? Well maybe it is fewer police officers that are giving out speeding tickets in our neighborhoods. Maybe it is fewer officers investigating a homicide, rape or burglary. Maybe it is fewer police working on gang prevention and suppression. Certainly it will lead to more police overtime which is an additional variable cost that is tough to budget.

The Council has discretion to ensure that a police academy does occur now, as it only takes six votes. The Council in the short term could simply allocate $4.5 million from the anti-tobacco funds (Healthy Neighborhood Venture Fund) and designate the money towards the police academy for 45 new officers. We have $7.8 million in this fund that has not been spent and could be directed on anything the Council wants.

Others would like to consider using these same funds to allow for more affordable housing and others would like to keep the status quo and continue to fund charities/non-profits which are not in our city charter. The remaining funds could be part of the longer term strategy to hire civilians to swap out police officers from desk duty and get them back on the street. The Police Chief, City Manager and City Auditor agree on this as stated in the report linked here.

I cannot be everything to everyone nor can the City be everything to everyone. We have to make choices that inevitably have trade-offs and make some unhappy. I was elected to vote on issues and make tough choices.

Here is a link that summarizes the peak year, recent year, and projected year performance for the City’s major revenues. Scroll to the right for big negative numbers.

The City of San Jose Budget Prioritization Survey is still open till Feb 5.

Also posted in Budget, Politics | Comments closed

Take Action!
Whole Foods Grand Opening
Connect
Three Creeks Trail Discussion
Connect on Facebook
Search the Blogs!

Note: This is Pierluigi Oliverio’s 300th Post:

Take Action!

Whole Foods Grand Opening

Connect

Three Creeks Trail Discussion

Connect on Facebook

Search the Blogs!