Oliverio for Supervisor 2018

Independent - Transparent - Fiscally Responsible

No Soup For You! No Park For You!

By

Last week the Council tackled two agenda items related to parks. One was to apply for a state grant. There is $184 million up for grabs for the entire state of California to be spent on city parks. California has 36 million people and San Jose has one million. If San Jose were to get 1/36th of those state funds, that would be $5 million.

Unfortunately, San Jose will not get any special consideration for our large population since the grant is focusing on low-income communities. Even our best park projects may not fare well due to our higher income levels citywide compared to other areas of the state. The wish list San Jose park staff submitted is for $55 million of park and trail projects.

I know the chance of state money for parks may sound exciting, but really it is sad commentary since the current council policy exempts affordable housing from paying park fees which has resulted in $70-90 million dollar loss to the city for parks. $70-90 million that could have purchased open space and trails so that all residents have access to a healthy community. I do not support this inequitable policy that makes us beg for a small piece of the pie when our own council policy made us lose the entire pie.

The other item was the city postponing the opening of 11 parks city- wide because there is no money to fund operations and maintenance. Residents came and spoke and asked: “Why doesn’t the city outsource park maintenance, which would cost less money?” Or “Why not let volunteers do all the maintenance.” Well, the council voted on outsourcing a few months back when a new stricter competition policy was passed by 7-4 vote that killed any chance for outsourcing ( I joined the Mayor in voting no). San Jose residents do not care who maintains a park just that it is maintained.

We have had great success with the Friends of the San Jose Rose Garden due to Terry Reilly’s commitment to organizing volunteers to help maintain all the roses at the park. The volunteers help augment the park maintenance and do not replace park maintenance personnel. It is a partnership between volunteers and city park staff. The current council policy does not allow for volunteers to operate lawn mowers, for example, which is a big part of park maintenance at parks city wide.

Another option I have voiced is allowing housing developers who deliver a turnkey park to maintain the new park for three years at their cost. In return, however, they should be allowed to pay the market rate and be able to hire and fire the private park maintenance service as they wish. This would save the city money, provide open space to residents and ensure new parks are defect free. Unfortunately this proposal is dead on arrival since the majority of the council would not support it.

So what we are seeing with the city ripping out plant landscaping in traffic medians and not opening parks since we do not have funds to maintain either of them, is just a small appetizer when it comes to plugging a $100 million dollar budget deficit. Remember the residents are second in this city after others get their cut. Hold on to your hats and definitely your wallets as it is going to get much worse.

Budget Prioritization Survey 2010 Results

By

The city of San Jose recently completed a scientific poll of 902 residents. This poll cost $50,000. As I mentioned in a prior blog, I took many of the poll questions and posted them on the District 6 website (the district I represent) and here, on San Jose Inside. I entered the questions and three of my own into a web-based survey solution which costs $20 a year. The survey closed yesterday with 839 completing the 15 page survey (973 respondents completed part of the survey). Unlike past surveys where District 6 residents were 90 percent of the respondents, only 43.9 percent of the respondents were from District 6 this time.

The city’s poll found that:
48% would support a half cent sales tax increase.
53% of likely voters would support a 1/4 cent sales tax increase.

The web survey poll showed:
54.4% of respondents would support a 1/2 cent sales tax increase.
51.2% would support a 1/4 cent sales tax.

When I removed all non San Jose respondents the numbers were 52.1% would support a 1/2 cent sales tax increase and 51.3% would support a 1/4 cent sales tax increase. A web survey does not control demographics and likely voters.

The City’s poll found that a majority of residents were supportive to some of the proposed cuts:
Delay opening the South SJ Police Substation 67%
Reducing public information hours at police station 66%
Reducing police patrolling downtown on horseback 61%
Reducing park rangers at regional parks 61%
Reducing senior nutrition 57%
Reducing enforcement of building codes 55%
Reducing graffiti removal 55%
Reducing park maintenance 53%

The web survey with only SJ residents were supportive of some of the proposed cuts:
Delay opening of South SJ Police Substation 73.%
Reducing public information hours at police station 86.6%
Reduce police patrolling downtown on horseback 75%
Reducing park rangers at regional parks 71.1%
Reducing senior nutrition 77%
Reducing enforcement of building codes 57.2%
Reducing graffiti removal 49.4%
Reducing park maintenance 56.6%
Reducing library hours 68.2%
Reducing recreation programs 64.9%

When asked how they would divide $100 among five different goals:

City’s poll:
Safe City $25
Prosperous City $23.80
Infrastructure $20.10
Green City $16.40
Vibrant City $14.80

Web Poll, SJ residents only:
Safe City $33.08
Prosperous City $18.26
Infrastructure $28.87
Green City $13.01
Vibrant City $13.41

When asked which one of the following three strategies the City of San Jose should place the highest priority on to address its budget shortfall?

City’s poll:

Reduce employee compensation & benefits 41%
Reduce existing city services 21%
Raising taxes & fees 25%
None & Don’t Know 13%

Web survey, SJ residents only:

Reduce employee compensation & benefits 58.2%
Reduce existing city services 15.9%
Raising taxes & fees 13.3%
None 7.5%
Don’t Know 5.1%

Here are results of SJ only respondents to the three questions I added:

Tax Medicinal Marijuana: 83.5% Yes, 9.6% No, 6.9% Don’t Know
New tax only for Trails: 43.9% Yes, 46.3% No, 9.9% Don’t Know
New tax only for Police: 30.8% Yes, 59.2% No, 10% Don’t Know

The support for taxing marijuana for medicinal uses tracks the voting results in the recent Colorado and Oakland elections.

However the biggest feedback from the survey for me was the 564 comments (495 from SJ residents). These comments are feedback to policy makers and are likely voices we will not hear at an actual council meeting.

Here is a link to all the questions and the 564 comments from respondents.

One person who participated in the survey made reference to me as a specific animal; that’s okay, this is America, land of free speech.  I thank everyone who participated.

On another topic, I attended a vigil on Saturday for the missing 83 year old woman who disappeared on Kingfisher Way in San Jose. Please go to this link for more information or if you have information that could help find her.

This is a good reminder for all of us to look out for our neighbors.

Candid Camera

By

Photo radar helps augment traffic safety, as well as that of pedestrians and neighborhoods. A tweaking of the current policy to improve safety will not cost the state any money, and in fact will raise money while at the same time lowering emergency room health care costs. Speeding cars in our neighborhoods continue to remain an issue. The City of San Jose does what it can to manage speeding on our streets with the dollars we are able to allocate.

The City deals with speeders cars in two ways. One is enforcement with our Traffic Enforcement Unit (TEU). TEU are police officers on motorcycles that split their time in neighborhood “hot spots” where speeding is reported. You can report speeding in your neighborhood by clicking this link.

The SJPD aggregates the complaints and then tries to prioritize them as a way to identify the hot spots. The other portion of traffic enforcement’s time is spent at intersections with the highest rate of car accidents. Of course, as pointed out last week on my blog, we only have a limited number of police officers covering a city of a million people.

The other City tool is our Department of Transportation (DOT), which has a small but dedicated group committed to traffic calming who work with a limited budget and are mandated to follow state law. The state determines signage, street markings and the actual speed limit on San Jose streets.

San Jose previously had photo radar: a van parked on streets that took pictures of car license plates that were speeding. However, due to issues at the state level, the program was eliminated. Data from the DOT showed that photo radar reduced speeding on neighborhood streets. Gov. Schwarzenegger has recently proposed an expansion of photo radar.

Drivers who speed are dangerous. Time and time again we have a tragedy of some innocent pedestrian getting killed by an irresponsible driver. Currently, red light running cameras are legal in California; the idea is to also allow that same camera to give out speeding tickets. There is also speculation of allowing mid-block radar as well.

If you believe speeding is a problem in your neighborhood please contact your state representative this week and tell them you support the expansion of photo radar.

Police cannot be on every street 24/7, but technology can help fill the gap. We need our limited police resources for actions that only a police officer can do like investigating violent crime, property crime, gangs and community policing.

On to other matters: On Friday, we released the mid-year budget review. We had less revenue than expected so we drained $4.5 million out of our $10 million economic uncertainty reserve. You may remember an October 2009 blog when a Lobbyist came to the council meeting lambasting the City to spend the reserve instead of saving the money. Individuals are told by financial planners to save six months of living expenses in case of unemployment, so our City, having a one percent reserve is the minimum and should be higher. Going forward we will have $5.5 million left out of an approximate billion dollar budget.

Also worth noting from the report was the annual Hayes Mansion subsidy from the city was $5.9 million which is equivalent to approximately 50 police officers or approximately 40 police officers and opening all of our libraries citywide on Sundays. Take your pick.

Finally our Building & Structure Construction Tax decreased 50 percent—from $8 million to $4 million. It’s important to note that affordable housing in San Jose is exempt from paying these fees that go towards the paving roads. As market rate housing is in the tank the only housing going forward are affordable housing projects that sadly do not provide parks either, again an exemption made by the city council.  Think of that next time you buy new shocks or tires for your car.

The City of San Jose Budget Prioritization Survey, available by clicking this link, closes Feb 5.

The Thinner Blue Line

By

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.

Budget Prioritization Survey

By

The City of San Jose has contracted with a public opinion survey company to poll residents on the city’s budget in a project fondly known as “the City of San Jose Budget Prioritization Survey.” The control group of the survey is 900 residents representing the entire City. They will be contacted by home and cell phones.

In the end, the survey company will try to ensure that the demographic breakdown of survey respondents mirrors the demographics of San Jose, with a certain margin for error. This data will be shared at a public study session at the City Council Feb. 16 at 9am.  This will give the Council scientific polling data on budget priorities from San Jose residents.  In addition to the phone survey we will be holding a Neighborhood Association/Youth Commission Priority Session this Saturday at 10am at City Hall in room 119 to discuss the budget deficit. Both meetings are public.

Since you may be one of the 1,006,000 residents who will not be getting a call, I wanted to share some of the questions via a web survey and then share the results on San Jose Inside on Feb 8.

On another note, the Council passed a citywide inclusionary housing policy which Councilmember Constant and I voted against. Then a few minutes later, the Council made an exemption to the policy for one section of the City. So although a citywide policy passed for every developer, the City made an exception that one development did not have to comply with the inclusionary housing policy. Makes me wonder; if inclusionary housing is such a good idea then why make an exception?

Here is a link to the City of San Jose Budget Prioritization Survey.

San Jose’s Native Gen X’ers

By

2009 was a challenging year. San Jose government had its decline in revenue in addition to suffering from an overall structural budget deficit. Many families in San Jose lost their jobs and still continue to struggle in finding another one. All of us have been impacted by the Great Recession of 2008-2009 in some way.

With the eye of the Great Recession’s hurricane ideally behind us, I look to 2010 as a year that government gets back to basics and provides the needs of the community, not the “wants.” For example, government should concentrate on how it will replace retiring police officers,(100 police retiring this year, which is double the normal rate) keep our libraries open and simply pass a budget that takes care of the basic things you would expect the city to provide as stated in the city charter. Basically, the things that you pay for as taxpayers.

I turned 40 in December. I spent my birthday with family and long-time friends. Many of my friends I have known since age five, from kindergarten in San Jose Unified School District, which equates to knowing most of my friends for more than 30 years. The majority of my friends are not political in their occupations and nearly all of them have never been to a San Jose Council meeting. Instead, they are teachers, nurses, Realtors, attorneys, tech folks, blue-collar skilled tradesmen, stay-at-home parents and—as my Mom likes to point out— most are married with children.

Many of my native San Jose friends have a very positive outlook towards San Jose. Their views are somewhat different than what I hear in my council office, where, typically, I hear alot about what is wrong with our city or questions as to why things aren’t done differently.

My friends income levels vary—some own the homes they live in while others rent. However, they all share similar dreams of San Jose’s future. Although they strive for a better city in many ways, they strongly believe that San Jose is a great city today. They are proud that we continue to have one of the safest big cities in the United States, and of our supportive of our police department. They like the small-town feel throughout the City even though we are a City of a million people, enjoy the great weather and, even with a recession, believe this region is still the best place to be by their standards.

When I spoke to my friends at my birthday and over the holidays in December, there was consensus that building the Arena and bringing in the Sharks were great decisions and because of that both female and male are positive on the chance of major league baseball in Downtown.  They enjoy going to our Downtown for the Children’s Discovery Museum, Tech Museum, Christmas in the Park and look forward to the reopening of Happy Hollow Park and Zoo.

Most importantly, is they said that they have a choice of where they can live which is why they chose San Jose. That is an important point to remember, since if a person really dislikes where they live then they can simply relocate as many people do all the time.

2010 will carry its challenges and there will be many tough decisions for the council and for individual families. However, I hope the worst is behind us. They say flat is the new up and with that we don’t expect big growth next year but maybe over time. The city on the other hand will take 2-3 years to recover as it takes awhile for revenues to return to municipalities.

I wish you and your family happiness and health in 2010.

Saturday, Jan 9 at 9am is the next volunteer day in our San Jose Municipal Rose Garden. 600 bare root roses will be given away to volunteers who arrive before 9am compliments of Star Roses. See you there.