The City Council discussed one of the world’s most precious resources last week; water. The council had its annual meeting with the Santa Clara Valley Water District. In the past, the two organizations have had some turbulent conversations; however, at this meeting we were all on the same page about conservation and the future supply of water.

Half of our water is imported from the Delta and Hetch Hetchy. Imported resources come with challenges, since you cannot always count on imports. A prime example is the 1970’s oil embargo.

San Jose has a facility that produces clean water. Not out of the ground but from what you and I flush, use in the sink and shower. I mentioned the facility and the opportunity for you to tour it in a past blog. Less then 1 percent of the water on this planet is available as fresh water. The water we do have is the same water used over and over again.The Water Pollution Control Plant allows San Jose to control its destiny by producing this scarce resource.

We built this facility to comply with the Federal Clean Water Act so that water discharge to the bay is clean, not contaminated. Over time, we have built purple pipes to distinguish the water supply. Purple pipes transport recycled water to industrial users for large projects like North San Jose and the new City Hall. To extend purple pipes to every home in San Jose for landscaping would take a long time and a lots of money.

We are in the midst of approving a new agreement with the Water District where we will provide recycled water.  We would also jointly fund future expansion of the Water Pollution Control Plant. The clean water that would be supplied to the Water District could be used to do stream-flow augmentation so that our creeks could have more water flowing in them. Another option is to pump the clean recycled water to the groundwater recharge ponds. Here, the recycled water would be diluted with rainwater and then percolate in the ponds and pick up all those natural minerals. Some time later the water would be pumped out of the ground and flow to our faucets to shower, cook and drink. Some find the idea of drinking recycled water inconceivable.  However, it is already done in Orange County, with 2.3M customers, and Singapore.

I believe that in my lifetime we will see wars over water supply in addition to the cost of water rising for the consumer. At the local level we should be planning to allow more options for our future that keep water in mind.

Water supply is one of the reasons I believe that the city of San Jose should build less housing. In the General Plan 2040 Task Force we have interest groups advocating for as many as 180,000 new housing units. Some of the Task Force members including myself want to see lower housing numbers—around 70,000. Let’s save the water for jobs and new industries.

Would you be open to drinking recycled water in the future that is cleaned by micro filtration, reverse osmosis, UV light and other advanced treatments?  In the Orange County facility, they have a tour that starts off showing waste water coming into the plant and then all the steps it goes through. Visitors can see and drink the clean water at the end. I myself have not visited the Orange County facility but would like to do so in the near future. In the meantimehere is a YouTube link about the Orange County facility.

Related to water this past Saturday, a group chose to clean a portion of the Los Gatos Creek trail in conjunction with the city of San Jose Great American Litter Pick Up. This small group of volunteers did a great job cleaning up the creek by filling over 50 bags with trash, removing 11 shopping carts and painting out graffiti.  Shout out to some of the hard working volunteers: Ed Rast, David Dearborn, Jack Nadeau, Robert Mulvany, Martin Delson among others.

Finally, a friendly reminder that I will be hosting the Concord Coalition on Monday 4, 7PM at City Hall Council Chambers for a showing of the movie I.O.U.S.A. Please RSVP to Pierluigi.Oliverio@SanJoseCA.gov

Although I was born and raised in San Jose, my visits to the East Side were not commonplace. As a kid, I was advised of general safety issues about the East Side and was warned not to go “there” at night. My father taught English to adult immigrants on the East Side for about half his teaching career, and I used to accompany him when my school was closed. I would sit in the back and meet his students from all over the world. In high school I would go to East Side high school sporting events, remembering that I needed to be careful—at least that is what I was told.

Recently, in an attempt to become better acquainted with East San Jose, I elicited the help of “Team Campos”—Councilmember Nora Campos and her brother, Planning Commissioner Xavier Campos who both grew up on the East Side. I toured District 5 with each of them separately to get the female and male perspective.

Historically, the East Side was more diverse then it is today. At one time, it had a large African American population near the beautiful new Mayfair Community Center. One of the largest African American churches in San Jose is a few blocks away from the center. A significant portion of Caucasian population left during the mid-’70s, so now, District 5 is majority Latino. It is with the Latino struggle that we have the history of Cesar Chavez organizing in East San Jose. I was shown a building behind Our Lady of Guadalupe church where Caesar held meetings. At that time it was adjacent to the old Mayfair packing plant.

East Side has many county pockets that are in the process of being annexed to the city of San Jose. Therefore, miles of sidewalks will be installed over the next decade.  Overall, the neighborhoods are dense with people, and it appears as though more people live in each house than in other neighborhoods.  As a result, there is very limited street parking. There are many converted garages.  Code enforcement is a full-time job, and the housing recession and foreclosures have added stress to the existing neighborhoods.

Various neighborhoods developed at different times on the East Side, like the Tropicana tract of the late ’50s, with nearly flat roofs, or later the Plata Arroyo tract, formerly a drive-in movie theater. Many houses have cyclone fences that divide the yard from the sidewalk which, in my opinion, gives a confined feeling.  Graffiti is definitely prevalent and it seems to me like a person could work 24/7 cleaning or painting out graffiti on the East Side. It is said that if graffiti stays up people die, because much of the tagging is gang-related, marking territory, which leads to higher chance of conflict. Dealing with the gang culture will continue to be a need. By the way, I recommend the new movie at the Camera Theaters, called “Sin Nombre,” which depicts gang culture and youth recruitment.

Good things are happening on the East Side, such as an increase in retail development occupied by mostly small business owners. And the Tropicana shopping center transformation with three new banks is a significant change. Form-based zoning is being planned for Alum Rock Avenue to prepare this area for development, and eventually help it become more of a destination. There are already many good restaurants on the East Side, like Texas Smokehouse on Story Road and El Pirrin on San Antonio—yummy.
Challenges will remain with adding more public transportation to this area since it has the highest ridership in the County. Also, making trails a reality, like the Silver Creek Trail that connects Lake Cunningham and the Coyote Creek. This trail may take decades, but it’s worth the wait, much like trails everywhere in San Jose.

Quoting Javier, “the East Side is better then it was 20 years ago.” It has its challenges no doubt as do other parts of our city. However, it is abundantly clear to me that building out Coyote Valley would have left the East Side further behind.

Xavier Campos as you may know will be running for city council in District 5 in 2010. He has deep roots in the East Side, knows the challenges of the past, present and has a vision of better East Side.

…I did not actually eat breakfast with members of the Chamber of Commerce last week, but I met with them early in the morning—which is a challenge for me since I normally go to bed at 1am. The Chamber, as many of you know, is an interest group that advocates on behalf of small and large businesses. They invited me to attend their meeting for some Q-and-A.

The Chamber, like labor unions, the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, or the League of Conservation Voters, typically endorses candidates running for political office. Endorsements carry clout with some voters, but more importantly, endorsements come with monetary donations, plus independent expenditures for political mail to voters, and volunteers to walk door-to-door on your behalf. In my Council election, the Chamber endorsed my opponent and as a result, they did four independent expenditures on his behalf in addition to donating money to his campaign.

Elected officials are asked on a routine basis to speak with special interest groups so they may better understand how you feel about issues, thought process, values, explain past votes,etc.. As this is my “City Hall Diary,” I wanted to let you know what we spoke about.

We chatted about San Jose Inside, which included many of my past blogs from the Rose Garden Park to the budget to pensions. They found much of what I have written and the comments posted to be refreshing and much more open-book then the norm.

Many of the members’ perspectives, in the real world, comes from their private sector work. Therefore, there is a deep understanding about the risk of capital, the adage that “time is money,” and that idea that there are no guarantees in life.  Needless to say, their questions and perspectives were much like the constituents in my district who email me.

They want to know: How can someone get paid over $275K in accumulated sick leave when they retire? How come the general fund must cover the stock market loss for city pensions when private individuals have no one to ask for help for their own retirement? Why don’t new employees not yet hired get 401K’s?

I was asked about my opposition to converting industrial land to housing.  As I have indicated before on this website, San Jose needs to keep land zoned industrial and preserve it for current or future job growth. My answer on this subject has remained the same whomever I speak to. We may very well convert an industrial parcel when my tenure in District 6 has passed or when the jobs catch up with housing growth.  In the meantime, there is plenty of land zoned residential that will be built out after the recession.

I did ask the volunteer members of the Chamber that since they have questions about government fiscal policies, perhaps they attend city budget meetings if they can get out of work. I also expressed my goal to serve the residents of San Jose above interest groups, and stated my belief that decisions should be based on what is best for the San Jose as a whole for the long term.

If you are in business for yourself or work in private sector you may agree more often then not with the views advocated by the Chamber.

On another note: Last week the question came up as to whether the City can switch our retirement plans to the State Employees program called CalPERS.  City pensions are in the City Charter XV, which would have to be maintained unless the Charter was changed by a citywide election. It is a complex move to transition from an independent plan to another system such as CalPERS, although other cities, such as Oakland, have done it.

There are two ways.  One is to have new employees go into CalPERS, and current employees and retirees would stay in the existing plans.  That is complicated because the liabilities would have to be paid with a declining number of members paying into the system—similar to Social Security.  The other way is to move everyone over, which would still require voter approval (by you). Increased retirement benefits require voter approval in San Francisco, however, in San Jose no election is needed, since actions take place through the Council or binding arbitration.

Our County Assessor was quoted on Friday as saying the downturn in real estate values is “worse than expected,” and that more than 90,000 residential parcels will be valued at less then their purchase price. We are living through historic times, with unprecedented negative growth in real estate. That has happened in Santa Clara County only a handful of times: in 1932,1933 and1936, and again in 1978 (after Prop 13) was passed. So what does that mean, other than many depressed homeowners? Well, it means that the City of San Jose’s deficit just catapulted to $77 million.

The City Manager announced Friday that we will have an additional shortfall of $14.3M due to lower property tax revenues on top of the sales tax decline which added another $3M to the deficit. I believe we will also see a sharp fall in our TOT (hotel tax) this quarter. This means less city services starting July 1, 2009 for you. But there is more…

You should be praying for the stock market to rise not just for your own 401K but for your city services. City pensions are self-insured, and if there is a shortfall, then money comes out of the General Fund. Today, the city matches employee contributions for retirement based on actuarial studies. For example, for Police, the city puts in 24.94 percent on top of the 11.96 percent the employee puts in. For Fire the city puts in 27.37 percent and the employee puts in 12.45 percent For the rest of city professional staff, the city puts in 22.68 percent on top of the 8.93 percent from the employee. Does your employer match your 401K to this level?

Now that the market has tanked, money must come from the General Fund to cover the loss. The good news is that we don’t need to cough up any money on July 1, 2009. The bad news is that we need to cough up money on July 1, 2010 for the next fiscal year. Of course, if the stock market completely recovers by the end of June 2009 then we are good—but that is doubtful.

Without a stock market recovery, the baseline contribution rate from the city would increase from 22.5 percent for Police & Fire to the range of 35.3-57.8 percent for July 1, 2010, and then rise again July 1, 2013 to 54.2-70.1 percent.  These are projections only. Let us hope they go down. But what this means in dollars is that the city would have to reduce the General Fund that pays for all the services we have counted on by $31M July 1,2010, $24M July 1,2011, $22M July 1,2012, $24M July 1,2013 for a total cost of $101M. That’s for Police and Fire only.

If these numbers are not evidence enough that we need to have a new benefit structure for new city employees, I am not sure what is.

I am sponsoring a viewing of a documentary titled “IOUSA.” This movie is an eye-opener about the looming financial catastrophe. This is the consequence of elected officials not making tough decisions, but promising everything without thought about future implications. In addition, a speaker from the bipartisan Concord Coalition will be speaking at the event. The Concord Coalition was started by two senators—one Democrat and one Republican—back in 1992 to bring awareness to the National Debt.

When: Monday May 4 from 7-9pm.
Where: San Jose City Hall Council Chambers (200 East Santa Clara Street)
Cost: Free, but limited seating
Click this link to watch a trailer from the documentary IOUSA:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBo2xQIWHiM
I look forward to you joining me and others on May 4. Please RSVP:Pierluigi.Oliverio@sanjoseca.gov

On Friday, March 20, I participated in a fun event called San Jose Bike Party. The “bike party” is organized by people who promote bicycling in San Jose. They pass out flyers at bike shops and use the internet to get the message out. There have been 18 “Bike Parties” so far and the 19th is coming up on April 17 at 8:45pm at the old Zorba the Greek Restaurant parking lot located at South Bascom Avenue and Stokes Avenue in District 6. The bike parties are themed events, around themes like mustaches, mardi gras, robots etc… The event has some of the flair of the Burning Man scene, plus some rockabilly style, but it also includes just regular bicycle enthusiasts.

I rode my vintage, made-in-Waterloo,-Wisconsin Trek bicycle with my bicycle partner, who works on a great program called Turning Wheels for Kids. After congregating at the shopping center, we were sounded off to obey the traffic rules, leave no rider behind, and to pick up any litter. San Jose Bike Party also encourages helmets plus both front and back bike lights—suggestions which I followed. Apparently, the more lights you had the cooler you were; some bikers that had lights wrapped around much of their respective bicycles.

At 9:20PM the Bike Party rolled south down Stokes and made a left on Southwest Expressway to Fruitdale. At this point it seemed like we were on the General Plan 2040 tour, passing several new housing developments across from the light rail line.  The group then massed to Willow Glen via side streets onto Lincoln Ave where 500 bicycles were counted by the event organizers. At this point we took up both right lanes on Lincoln Ave and little more. Onlookers were wondering what was going on, and the response was always the same as bikers yelled out “Bike Party!”

The caravan of bikes continued down Lincoln Ave and merged onto Almaden Expressway then went all the way to Blossom Hill making, a left turn en masse. The group pulled off at an empty strip mall parking lot to regroup. At this point the tandem bike that was towing a couch turned on a stereo and then younger folks started dancing instantly. After five-to-ten minutes we rode together through Oakridge Mall where again spectators were stunned by so many bicycles cruising by.  We then went all the way up to the Oakridge mall parking lot roof where we enjoyed a view of San Jose and again the music sounded and the dance party started again briefly.

From here, we went down Winfield to Pearl Avenue, passing another housing project at the Chynoweth Station (side note: not enough density in this development makes the attempt at retail nearly impossible). We then proceeded south passing the Capitol Auto Mall to the Rubino Circle neighborhood, and down to Old Almaden Road which put us back on Almaden Expressway. We then passed the Canoas Gardens neighborhood and made the fork back into Willow Glen, since my bicycle partner was tired. The Bike Party continued on all the way to Downtown finishing at SJSU. The ride was assisted by one or two SJPD cars off and on, offering automobile drivers awareness of the approaching bike party. Thank you SJPD.

If you like to ride a bike and enjoy people, then you may very well enjoy the next Bike Party. Remember to wear a helmet and grab some lights!

Last week I responded to many of your questions with a term, “Meet-and-Confer.” This terminology is used in reference to discussions that city management has with unions about almost anything.

Once a labor contract is agreed upon, any thought of a change requires a meet-and-confer meeting. It could be a compensation freeze, sick time, vacation time, grievance, health care, retirement, education reimbursement, uniform allowance, time off with pay to conduct union activities, examining the possibility of using a non- union person to provide a city service, or even discussions about future employees who have not been hired yet, etc… So with the current budget deficit, if we want to have a discussion about city staff taking one day off without pay ($2.88M) to avoid layoffs, then there needs to be a closed-door meeting.

As an elected official, I have absolutely zero knowledge of these meetings except what is paraphrased for me by city management. So there are times where union members have genuine concerns and mention that city management did not answer questions, did not provide data or were playing games. How do I know one way or another what happened, since these meetings are secret? It becomes a he-said-she-said situation and burns everyone’s time going back and forth.

More often then not, the Union Business Agent is the person in the closed door meeting. They do not work for the city but are paid by the union to represent and negotiate on behalf of our professional city staff. They are paid from union dues and agency fees that come out of city employees’ paychecks. Last year that amount was $7,164,760.89, and approximately half of that amount can be spent on political campaigns.

I looked back at a prior blog I wrote on May 19, 2008, where I suggested that we allow more sunshine on labor negotiations. My view is still the same for both traditional labor negotiations and binding arbitration. Here is a clip from what I wrote nearly a year ago:

Labor negotiations are a long arduous process. In the past, the city and the unions have both pointed fingers at each other. Perhaps if these meetings were discussed in public, then there would be no finger-pointing. In the era of sunshine, maybe we should consider making these meetings public, as is done in other parts of the country. It would be interesting to know, for example, the full dollar amounts on proposals from each side through each stage of the negotiation, prior to final agreement.

If the city was being unfair, then everyone would know. If labor was asking too much, or they had good points about cost-of-living adjustments or worker safety then we would know.  With the bankruptcy of our neighbor, Vallejo, it seems like we should shine more light on collective bargaining, or, at least, the city should provide some type of summary of the negotiations to the public at an earlier time. If allowing the public to view the negotiations in real time would harm privacy, then, perhaps, the negotiations should be taped on video and shown after the agreement has been reached.  The negotiations could be viewable on the internet or Channel 26.  That way, the public would at least get to see what took place.

In the end, we on the council vote on compensation and benefit increases. However, we as a council will be long gone when the aggregate effect of past votes impacts the budget and neighborhood services. If decisions are made behind closed doors without public scrutiny, then it is easier to make unrealistic financial choices.

Making negotiations public will not take anything away from workers or make negotiations a game of “winners” and “losers.” People need to be paid a good wage with good benefits, that’s for sure.

With a total compensation of $815M and a General Fund of just over $1 billion we need to let the taxpayer know what is going on otherwise they will not support tax increases to provide city services.

Perhaps residents of San Jose should be allowed to vote on this topic?