By Pete Pomerleau
Admiral Yamamoto could have been speaking for the San Jose City Council when he said: "We have awoken a sleeping giant." Yamamoto’s sleeping giant was the United States, awoken by the bombing of Pearl Harbor. The giant in today's terms is the body of active and retired employees of the City of San Jose, and the battle is over our pension plans.
For those not up to speed, the City is in full-on attack mode. City administration hired an outside agency from Canada called Cortex to look at making our pension plan "better." We were assured during meetings with these consultants that we as stakeholders would have a say in any re-organization. I can tell you for a fact that we will, because this is a clear meet-and-confer issue under our contracts, as noted by Bobby Lopez and Randy Sekany in their blog last week on Protect San Jose.
I spent two nights last week listening to and addressing some of the changes proposed by Cortex that the City is planning to ram down our throats. Beyond the damage these changes would do to officer morale as well as our recruitment and retention efforts, the proposed plan is just plain flawed.
The best people to manage a pension fund are the employees who pay into it. City staff has been trying to figure out ways to cut into our well-managed plans for years to subsidize the many financial quagmires they’ve gotten themselves into. We have to scale back on our new Southern Substation because of poor business decisions and practices made by supposed experts. We couldn't even get our new City Hall completed without numerous problems, and we hired the best architects in the country. Now the city wants us to hire more experts to manage our pensions. Well, I’ve got news for you: You could hire Warren Buffet to manage our funds, but he wouldn’t be able to guarantee higher returns.
I want to share some other ideas that were presented to us by Cortex and some of our responses. For reference, you should click here to open their report, which City Manager Figone brought before the City Council on June 23rd.
On page 27 of the report (p. 33 of the pdf), Cortex cites “good” examples of companies that changed their retirement boards in similar ways. Funny, but the numbers I have tell quite a different story:
• Canada Pension Plan: lost 18.6%
• National Railroad Retirement Investment Trust: lost 19%
• Yale Corporation Investment Fund: lost 25% this year
On the other hand, during 2008, the San Jose Police and Fire pension plan lost 5.1% and the Federated plan lost 3.1%. The question begs to be asked: What are we getting by putting our future in the hands of the “experts”?
As members, we contribute a chunk of our salaries every payday to the future of our plan. We also contribute our tax money into the plan along with every other resident. This is a well-developed plan that has generated tens of millions of dollars in returns to the City. We never asked for a bigger cut while the City reaped the rewards in the bullish years. But they have seen it fit to attack and demonize us in the court of public opinion in the lean years.
Maybe in the future the City should think about putting some revenue away for a rainy day, rather than spending it on non-essential services. Wouldn’t that be a sound business idea?
Before I sign off, you should know that Councilmembers Ash Kalra and Rose Herrera sat through both community outreach meetings last week. They listened as City employees described their frustrations. Rose even walked through the crowds and spoke one-on-one with us. This is a fine example of the dialogue we so desperately need to have with our Councilmembers. I’d like to thank Ash and Rose for leading the way.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
Righting a Wrong
You might have seen this story by Lisa Krieger in the Mercury News about Boy Scout Troop 294, which had volunteered to help clean up newly-renamed Jeffrey Fontana Park in Almaden Valley. Chris Coutinho, a scout trying to become an Eagle Scout, left a rented Hilti rotary hammer at the park entrance while he went to pick up supplies at a nearby Home Depot. When he returned, the power hammer had been stolen, and Chris and his troop were on the hook for $5,000 to replace it.
Well, we're happy to say that the San Jose Police Officers' Association Victim's Assistance Fund has stepped up to help raise money to defray the cost of the hammer. Donations can be made online at www.sjpoa.com. You can also mail a check payable to SJPOA-CF to SJPOA-CF, c/o Chris Countinho, 1151 N. 4th Street, San Jose, CA 95112. For more information, call 408-298-1133. We'll post updates on this story in later blogs.
Stay safe, and have a great weekend!
Well, we're happy to say that the San Jose Police Officers' Association Victim's Assistance Fund has stepped up to help raise money to defray the cost of the hammer. Donations can be made online at www.sjpoa.com. You can also mail a check payable to SJPOA-CF to SJPOA-CF, c/o Chris Countinho, 1151 N. 4th Street, San Jose, CA 95112. For more information, call 408-298-1133. We'll post updates on this story in later blogs.
Stay safe, and have a great weekend!
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Ask Beat Cop
Readers,
Every other Thursday, we post columns by Beat Cop, one of over 1,300 sworn San Jose police officers who keep us safe by protecting our streets and neighborhoods. So far, Beat Cop has commented on the rise of burglaries in San Jose and what citizens can do to prevent it, exposed deficiencies in police staffing and budgeting, and informed us of new programs that help residents and business owners fight back against vandalism.
To be sure, Beat Cop has plenty more stories to tell, but this week, we’re debuting a new feature of Protect San Jose that will allow you to ask direct questions of San Jose’s finest. If you’ve ever wondered why three or four black-and-whites were needed for the same traffic stop, or how many cops are patrolling your neighborhood on any given night, or what eight years of budget cuts mean to the average cop on the street, now’s your chance to Ask Beat Cop.
If you’d like to submit a question, click here and fill out the form provided. Be sure to include your first name and email address. Beat Cop will respond to all of your questions and even blog some answers in the bi-weekly Beat Cop column.
We hope you enjoy this new experiment. Stay safe.
Protect San Jose
Every other Thursday, we post columns by Beat Cop, one of over 1,300 sworn San Jose police officers who keep us safe by protecting our streets and neighborhoods. So far, Beat Cop has commented on the rise of burglaries in San Jose and what citizens can do to prevent it, exposed deficiencies in police staffing and budgeting, and informed us of new programs that help residents and business owners fight back against vandalism.
To be sure, Beat Cop has plenty more stories to tell, but this week, we’re debuting a new feature of Protect San Jose that will allow you to ask direct questions of San Jose’s finest. If you’ve ever wondered why three or four black-and-whites were needed for the same traffic stop, or how many cops are patrolling your neighborhood on any given night, or what eight years of budget cuts mean to the average cop on the street, now’s your chance to Ask Beat Cop.
If you’d like to submit a question, click here and fill out the form provided. Be sure to include your first name and email address. Beat Cop will respond to all of your questions and even blog some answers in the bi-weekly Beat Cop column.
We hope you enjoy this new experiment. Stay safe.
Protect San Jose
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Meet and Confer
By Bobby Lopez & Randy Sekany
As promised two months ago, the City of San Jose will do public outreach this week on proposed changes to its employee retirement boards. Up to now, neither of our organizations has been engaged in the outreach process – even though this is a “meet-and-confer” issue per our contracts. (This was the case in 2000, when the board was expanded from five to seven members.) Nonetheless, we’ll be attending public meetings at City Hall to learn more about what’s being proposed. We’re always open to listening and talking about ways to improve things.
Under the current system, the boards are made up of two city councilmembers, two active employees, one retired employee, a member of the Civil Service Commission, and a city administrator with experience in financial matters. The City’s consultants have proposed eliminating the two council positions, the Civil Service Commissioner, and the city administrator in favor of four outside financial experts, who would be appointed by the City Council.
Putting experts in charge of the pension funds sounds like a good idea – or does it? Weren’t Wall Street financial expert responsible for our recent financial disaster? This is something we should think about and talk about.
Regardless of who was sitting on our retirement boards, our pension funds were bound to take a short-term hit thanks to the stock market collapse. In fact, when you look at other struggling funds around the country, we’re in pretty good shape. Despite all the losses, our pensions are still fully funded, and that’s a testament to how well they’ve been managed by the current boards.
The bottom line is: everybody’s interested in improving things. We all have a stake in the City’s financial security because it’s all our dollars that make it run. Like you, we’re anxious to see the results of this week’s public outreach meetings, but we want to make sure that whatever comes out of these proposals, nothing is done to jeopardize the top priority of our organizations and our residents: public safety.
We invite you to attend these meetings to hear what city staff has to say. Tonight’s meeting is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. in City Hall Wing rooms 118 & 119. Tomorrow’s meeting is at 1:30 p.m. in City Council chambers.
Thanks for reading, and stay safe out there.
Bobby Lopez is President of the San Jose Police Officers’ Association, and Randy Sekany is President of the International Association of Firefighters Local 230 in San Jose.
As promised two months ago, the City of San Jose will do public outreach this week on proposed changes to its employee retirement boards. Up to now, neither of our organizations has been engaged in the outreach process – even though this is a “meet-and-confer” issue per our contracts. (This was the case in 2000, when the board was expanded from five to seven members.) Nonetheless, we’ll be attending public meetings at City Hall to learn more about what’s being proposed. We’re always open to listening and talking about ways to improve things.
Under the current system, the boards are made up of two city councilmembers, two active employees, one retired employee, a member of the Civil Service Commission, and a city administrator with experience in financial matters. The City’s consultants have proposed eliminating the two council positions, the Civil Service Commissioner, and the city administrator in favor of four outside financial experts, who would be appointed by the City Council.
Putting experts in charge of the pension funds sounds like a good idea – or does it? Weren’t Wall Street financial expert responsible for our recent financial disaster? This is something we should think about and talk about.
Regardless of who was sitting on our retirement boards, our pension funds were bound to take a short-term hit thanks to the stock market collapse. In fact, when you look at other struggling funds around the country, we’re in pretty good shape. Despite all the losses, our pensions are still fully funded, and that’s a testament to how well they’ve been managed by the current boards.
The bottom line is: everybody’s interested in improving things. We all have a stake in the City’s financial security because it’s all our dollars that make it run. Like you, we’re anxious to see the results of this week’s public outreach meetings, but we want to make sure that whatever comes out of these proposals, nothing is done to jeopardize the top priority of our organizations and our residents: public safety.
We invite you to attend these meetings to hear what city staff has to say. Tonight’s meeting is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. in City Hall Wing rooms 118 & 119. Tomorrow’s meeting is at 1:30 p.m. in City Council chambers.
Thanks for reading, and stay safe out there.
Bobby Lopez is President of the San Jose Police Officers’ Association, and Randy Sekany is President of the International Association of Firefighters Local 230 in San Jose.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Just the Taxes, Ma'am
By Ed Rast
Do you know why San Jose city administration year after year has recommended police staffing and budget cuts?
The primary reason is for the last eight years San Jose has had a “structural budget deficit” — in other words, city government’s projected revenues (from taxes, fees, licenses, service charges and other sources) are less than projected spending. State law requires cities to have balanced operating budgets for each year when city revenues are equal to or less than projected spending.
San Jose revenues increased steadily from 1990 through 2007-08, at a rate between 1% and 13% a year, except for FY 2002-03 and 2003-04 when they declined 3% and 1% respectively following the burst of the dot com bubble. City revenues decreased again in 2008-09 and are projected to fall once more in 2009-10 due to the ongoing economic recession.
Have a look at these three tables:
• California General Revenues by city/county
• Population — California Department of Finance Demographics
• General Revenues per Resident
(Source: Computations by CaliforniaCityFinance.com from State Controller and Dept. of Finance data, 1991-92 through 2005-06.)
San Jose’s average General Fund revenue of $663 per resident ranks around the middle of both the 15 cities in Santa Clara County (5th of 15) and the 12 largest cities in California (5th of 12). (On a brighter note, this has improved from 1991-92, when we were 9th out of 15 in Santa Clara County and 8th out of 12 large California cities.)
The cities in Santa Clara County with higher tax revenues than San Jose have more jobs and businesses, more sales taxes, or both. Here’s the top ten and how they rank for total revenue per resident, jobs per 100 residents, and consumer sales tax revenue per resident:
1. Palo Alto: $1,194 revenue per resident; 254 jobs per 100 employed residents; and $228 consumer sales tax revenue per resident
2. Mountain View: $998; 147; $125
3. Los Gatos: $860; 143; n/a
4. Santa Clara: $ 848; 218; $159
5. San Jose: $663; 88; $82
6. Gilroy: $658; 83; $200
7. Milpitas: $655; 164; $133
8. Sunnyvale: $628; 125; n/a
9. Campbell: $607; 108; $138
10. Cupertino: $581; 147; $82
San Jose does not have sufficient jobs for all of our employed residents and during the workday loses 50,069 or 5.6% of our residential population when they commute to other cites for jobs. The resulting loss of sales tax from spending by both individuals and business and other business-related revenues is in the tens of millions of dollars per year.
In July 2008, the U.S. Census estimated San Francisco’s residential population at 808,976 with daytime population increasing by 168,747 (21.7%) due to work commuting, for a grand total of 977,723. At the same time, San Jose’s residential population of 948,279 drops to 898,210 during the workday.
By comparison, Palo Alto adds 47,707 workers or 81% of its residential population, while Santa Clara adds 54,655 workers (63%), Milpitas 18,948 (30%), Mountain View 18,972 (26%), Cupertino 11,119 (22%), and Sunnyvale 18,163 (13%).
Here’s how San Jose compares to other large California cites in terms of revenue per resident:
1. San Francisco: $2459
2. Oakland: $873
3. Los Angeles: $768
4. Sacramento: $758
5. San Jose: $663
All four cities ahead of San Jose have a higher ratio of jobs per resident, and many have higher sales tax revenue per resident.*
In coming weeks, we will continue this discussion about San Jose’s structural budget deficit, city revenue sources, where taxes are being spent, other city budget comparisons, policies/practices that affect our city budget and revenue, and spending and policy recommendations.
In the meantime, to better understand San Jose’s budget and how it compares to other city’s budgets, you can track back and read my June 30th “Dollars and Sense” blog and last week’s “Priorities and Objectives".
* Data sources:
1. General Tax revenue comparisons 2005-06 data by city, jobs per employed resident and sales tax revenue per resident from CaliforniaCityFinance.com
2. City Population and Commuting Workers from U.S. Census
3. 2007 Consumer Sales Tax from City of San Jose / MBIA – Consumer Sales Tax Retail, Transportation and Food Products from SJEconomy.com
Do you know why San Jose city administration year after year has recommended police staffing and budget cuts?
The primary reason is for the last eight years San Jose has had a “structural budget deficit” — in other words, city government’s projected revenues (from taxes, fees, licenses, service charges and other sources) are less than projected spending. State law requires cities to have balanced operating budgets for each year when city revenues are equal to or less than projected spending.
San Jose revenues increased steadily from 1990 through 2007-08, at a rate between 1% and 13% a year, except for FY 2002-03 and 2003-04 when they declined 3% and 1% respectively following the burst of the dot com bubble. City revenues decreased again in 2008-09 and are projected to fall once more in 2009-10 due to the ongoing economic recession.
Have a look at these three tables:
• California General Revenues by city/county
• Population — California Department of Finance Demographics
• General Revenues per Resident
(Source: Computations by CaliforniaCityFinance.com from State Controller and Dept. of Finance data, 1991-92 through 2005-06.)
San Jose’s average General Fund revenue of $663 per resident ranks around the middle of both the 15 cities in Santa Clara County (5th of 15) and the 12 largest cities in California (5th of 12). (On a brighter note, this has improved from 1991-92, when we were 9th out of 15 in Santa Clara County and 8th out of 12 large California cities.)
The cities in Santa Clara County with higher tax revenues than San Jose have more jobs and businesses, more sales taxes, or both. Here’s the top ten and how they rank for total revenue per resident, jobs per 100 residents, and consumer sales tax revenue per resident:
1. Palo Alto: $1,194 revenue per resident; 254 jobs per 100 employed residents; and $228 consumer sales tax revenue per resident
2. Mountain View: $998; 147; $125
3. Los Gatos: $860; 143; n/a
4. Santa Clara: $ 848; 218; $159
5. San Jose: $663; 88; $82
6. Gilroy: $658; 83; $200
7. Milpitas: $655; 164; $133
8. Sunnyvale: $628; 125; n/a
9. Campbell: $607; 108; $138
10. Cupertino: $581; 147; $82
San Jose does not have sufficient jobs for all of our employed residents and during the workday loses 50,069 or 5.6% of our residential population when they commute to other cites for jobs. The resulting loss of sales tax from spending by both individuals and business and other business-related revenues is in the tens of millions of dollars per year.
In July 2008, the U.S. Census estimated San Francisco’s residential population at 808,976 with daytime population increasing by 168,747 (21.7%) due to work commuting, for a grand total of 977,723. At the same time, San Jose’s residential population of 948,279 drops to 898,210 during the workday.
By comparison, Palo Alto adds 47,707 workers or 81% of its residential population, while Santa Clara adds 54,655 workers (63%), Milpitas 18,948 (30%), Mountain View 18,972 (26%), Cupertino 11,119 (22%), and Sunnyvale 18,163 (13%).
Here’s how San Jose compares to other large California cites in terms of revenue per resident:
1. San Francisco: $2459
2. Oakland: $873
3. Los Angeles: $768
4. Sacramento: $758
5. San Jose: $663
All four cities ahead of San Jose have a higher ratio of jobs per resident, and many have higher sales tax revenue per resident.*
In coming weeks, we will continue this discussion about San Jose’s structural budget deficit, city revenue sources, where taxes are being spent, other city budget comparisons, policies/practices that affect our city budget and revenue, and spending and policy recommendations.
In the meantime, to better understand San Jose’s budget and how it compares to other city’s budgets, you can track back and read my June 30th “Dollars and Sense” blog and last week’s “Priorities and Objectives".
* Data sources:
1. General Tax revenue comparisons 2005-06 data by city, jobs per employed resident and sales tax revenue per resident from CaliforniaCityFinance.com
2. City Population and Commuting Workers from U.S. Census
3. 2007 Consumer Sales Tax from City of San Jose / MBIA – Consumer Sales Tax Retail, Transportation and Food Products from SJEconomy.com
Monday, August 24, 2009
Crime Stoppers Make a Big Splash
By Jim Cogan
This month, among arrests for drug sales, assault and burglary was a new one for me. One of the criminals arrested through a Silicon Valley Crime Stoppers tip had 44 stolen tickets to Raging Waters valued at $2,200. (Maybe he was in planning on a whole summer worth of daycations.) While it doesn't sound serious, this crime could result in charges like felony grand theft. I guess you could say that this guy is all washed-up and could get sent up the river for a long time thanks to an anonymous tip from a concerned citizen.
All joking aside, crimes like this one are all too common and can have a devastating affect on businesses that are just barely making it in this economy. It is unclear how the suspect was able to get so many tickets, but in many cases it is an inside job. Merchandise theft from employees results in millions of dollars in lost profits annually.
At Crime Stoppers, we are serious about helping businesses avoid unnecessary losses. We have worked with retailers and their loss prevention departments to make employees aware that they can call Crime Stoppers and remain anonymous. If you know of anyone stealing from your employer, then please call our tip line at (408) 947-STOP.
Crime Stoppers also made a big splash this month in San Jose by partnering with Councilmember Madison Nguyen to give her constituents a tangible way that they can make a difference in their community. A couple of years ago, Councilmember Nguyen approached me about partnering with us to pass out t-shirts with the Crime Stoppers name and phone number printed on them. Hundreds of San Jose residents learned about Silicon Valley Crime Stoppers this year thanks to this partnership and Councilmember Nguyen’s support of the program.
Thank you, Councilmember Nguyen. Crime Stoppers works because of leaders like you.
Jim Cogan is President of Silicon Valley Crime Stoppers. This is a monthly report he writes exclusively for Protect San Jose.
This month, among arrests for drug sales, assault and burglary was a new one for me. One of the criminals arrested through a Silicon Valley Crime Stoppers tip had 44 stolen tickets to Raging Waters valued at $2,200. (Maybe he was in planning on a whole summer worth of daycations.) While it doesn't sound serious, this crime could result in charges like felony grand theft. I guess you could say that this guy is all washed-up and could get sent up the river for a long time thanks to an anonymous tip from a concerned citizen.
All joking aside, crimes like this one are all too common and can have a devastating affect on businesses that are just barely making it in this economy. It is unclear how the suspect was able to get so many tickets, but in many cases it is an inside job. Merchandise theft from employees results in millions of dollars in lost profits annually.
At Crime Stoppers, we are serious about helping businesses avoid unnecessary losses. We have worked with retailers and their loss prevention departments to make employees aware that they can call Crime Stoppers and remain anonymous. If you know of anyone stealing from your employer, then please call our tip line at (408) 947-STOP.
Crime Stoppers also made a big splash this month in San Jose by partnering with Councilmember Madison Nguyen to give her constituents a tangible way that they can make a difference in their community. A couple of years ago, Councilmember Nguyen approached me about partnering with us to pass out t-shirts with the Crime Stoppers name and phone number printed on them. Hundreds of San Jose residents learned about Silicon Valley Crime Stoppers this year thanks to this partnership and Councilmember Nguyen’s support of the program.
Thank you, Councilmember Nguyen. Crime Stoppers works because of leaders like you.
Jim Cogan is President of Silicon Valley Crime Stoppers. This is a monthly report he writes exclusively for Protect San Jose.
Friday, August 21, 2009
Open Forum Friday
Given the popularity of our last open forum experiment, we're more than happy to roll it out again.
It's been a busy week at City Hall...
• The City Council approved a funding plan for $5 million in cost overruns on the South San Jose police substation, cutting back on other planned public safety projects like the regional driver training center.
• The Consortium for Police Leadership in Equity was back before Council committees with a quarterly report as they look to begin their study of police practices in San Jose.
• And Protect San Jose's resident statistical guru Ed Rast and the rest of the Sunshine Reform Task Force that he chairs made their Phase II recommendations, albeit through the middle man of the Rules Committee.
Let us know what's on your mind.
It's been a busy week at City Hall...
• The City Council approved a funding plan for $5 million in cost overruns on the South San Jose police substation, cutting back on other planned public safety projects like the regional driver training center.
• The Consortium for Police Leadership in Equity was back before Council committees with a quarterly report as they look to begin their study of police practices in San Jose.
• And Protect San Jose's resident statistical guru Ed Rast and the rest of the Sunshine Reform Task Force that he chairs made their Phase II recommendations, albeit through the middle man of the Rules Committee.
Let us know what's on your mind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
