Oliverio for Supervisor 2018

Independent - Transparent - Fiscally Responsible

On Gangs and Doing the Right Thing

By

image
Neighborhood Watch programs serve as one tool for communities to combat gangs. (Photo by hsivonen, via Flickr)

The Mayor’s Gang Prevention Task Force held its fifth annual community summit Saturday, and more than a hundred San Jose residents were in attendance. This task force started in 1993, spanning the terms of three mayors, three district attorneys and five police chiefs. The Department of Justice believes that the Mayor’s Gang Prevention Task Force is a model to be emulated by other cities across the USA.

The summit had four different breakout sessions. I attended the following three: promoting Neighborhood Watch programs, recognizing distinguishing characteristics of different gangs, and gang exiting strategies from a female, Latina perspective.

For me, much of the information presented at the meeting served as an unfortunate reminder of the havoc gangs create in our communities. From youth violence and drug trafficking to prostitution and other forms of organized crime, gangs represent one of the single most detrimental forces in society. Gangs rob individuals of their personal freedoms and introduce unwelcome violence into our neighborhoods. Organized crime impedes the legitimate economic activity that allows communities to prosper. This much I already knew.

What I was surprised to learn is that gangs use social media in a very effective fashion, sharing information and communicating across platforms, such as Facebook, with affiliates in different cities. This expanded reach ensures that gang-related activity does not stop at neighborhood, state or country lines. Indeed, countries and cities throughout the world struggle with this challenge. But the fact remains: Gangs are more organized now than ever before, and we must be organized in our efforts to curb their expansion and appeal.

To this end, I am hoping residents will join city officials in recommitting to crime prevention practices. This includes watching out for and reporting suspicious behavior, block by block, via the Neighborhood Watch program. For its part, the city will continue the good work currently underway by the Mayor’s Gang Prevention Task Force, including but not limited to community engagement and youth intervention programs. In addition, we should prioritize filling existing vacancies in the police department to augment gang suppression efforts.

The sad truth of the matter is that gangs will never disappear entirely, even from the most vigilant and proactive of communities. A city can never have complete control over the unpredictable nature of select deviants, or be held responsible for the unfortunate choices these individuals sometimes make. Fortunately, we have many hardworking and sincere people in San Jose who are doing their best to prevent young people from making choices that may lead to a life spent in and out of jail. This gives me hope, because—given the opportunity—I feel that most youth will see the wisdom in choosing the path of non-violence.

For those of you who were unable to attend the summit and want to learn more, click here.

Tuesday is for Meetings

By

image
Woody Allen had a theory on success. He said most of the hard work was just by showing up. (Photo by rasdourian, via Flickr)

Tuesday is the day that councilmembers reserve for City Council meetings.Closed session council meetings start at 9-9:30am and often continue past noon. The public council session starts at 1:30pm, often merging into the evening session with a short break. If no evening session is scheduled, then the afternoon session simply continues into the evening until the entire agenda is covered.

Woody Allen once said that, “Eighty percent of success is showing up,” and many would agree with that statement. Fortunately, I have not had any family emergencies and thus I have been able to attend every council meeting and council committee meeting since 2007. Many council meetings, especially the years 2007-2010, went from morning till near midnight. It is our duty to attend the council meetings, specifically for the agenda items that require voting, and stay for as long at the meeting takes; just like an employee is expected to attend a meeting hosted by their employer.

Councilmembers have an obligation to attend council meetings and council committee meetings; however, there is no requirement that you must actually stay the entire meeting. But attendance is taken multiple times at council meetings.

First, you are marked absent if you are a few minutes late at the very start of the morning closed session meeting. Attendance is taken again during the closed session meeting, when each attendee signs a document. Finally, attendance is again taken at the afternoon and evening meetings.

Councilmembers are able to leave as needed if they are not feeling well or have some personal matter to attend to. Councilmembers need only be present for half the meeting to avoid being marked as absent. If not present for the vote of an agenda item(s), then they are marked as absent for the vote(s). If councilmembers are in the restroom during a vote, they are still marked as absent—so best to monitor one’s intake of water.

Every level of government has official legislative/committee meetings and attendance is the minimum requirement. However just because one elected official wants to leave the meeting does not mean everything should come to a stop. If you need to go, then go, but leave it at that.

Many wish that the actual council meetings were shorter than they are today. The bulk of the council meeting is actually the unlimited discussion by council and mayor. On the other hand, public discussion is limited to two minutes and sometimes only one minute per each speaker. While members of the public speak, each Councilmember has that ability to view a timer that tracks the speaker’s time till you hear the famous words, “Your time is up.”

In the U.S. House of Representatives, members are limited in their speaking time. For example, members are given five minutes for committee meetings. So, rather than limiting the amount of time that the council or mayor may speak, perhaps the same timer used for the public should be allowed to run, tracking how long a councilmember, mayor or staff has spoken or is still speaking. This would allow for more concise and direct dialogue rather than circuitous speeches.

For example, tomorrow the council will burn a couple of hours discussing county and state ballot initiatives.

If you are the type of person who dislikes meetings, then I would discourage you from seeking elected office.

Habitat Conservation Plan

By

For over 10 years, San Jose has been struggling with implementing a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). HCP is a regulation imposed by the Federal government to restore natural habitats and preserve wildlife, like the spot checkered butterfly and the burrowing owl. HCP is an unfunded mandate from the Federal government levied on local government. Federal agencies are not big on waivers or tweaks, as they have one goal and that is the regulation and job security.

The main premise is that any and all new development—even if rebuilding an existing structure—would pay a substantial fee under an adopted HCP. This fee would create yet another hurdle for economic development in the name of saving wildlife. To some, this may just be fine since wildlife may have a higher value than economic development, like jobs. To others, they may not care since much of the wildlife in San Jose actually resides in much of California. Relocating burrowing owls, for example, within the existing city infrastructure to outside the city is frowned upon.

For others, who would rather see near zero development in San Jose, they will very much enjoy the potential outcome of a HCP. The implementation of a HCP would potentially cease development and have San Jose become more expensive than surrounding cities like Santa Clara, Sunnyvale and Milpitas. Now that we have an adopted General Plan that emphasizes development of land for jobs, this is a great time to encourage economic development. However, with this new fee, San Jose could lose out on new job growth, and, as a consequence, tax revenue. The cities to our north in Santa Clara County are exempt from the HCP, because they are built out and San Jose, on the other hand, is punished for implementing a green belt. The HCP would include Morgan Hill and Gilroy.

Other areas like San Diego have enabled residents to decide this question by taxing themselves via sales tax or parcel tax. The premise of the HCP is that there is a high value to preserving the natural habitats of certain animals and restoring habitats. If it is such a high value, then residents may choose that value when they vote to tax themselves for that value. If it is not highly valued by the electorate, then we will have to go down the road of taxing all future development to pay for the sins of the past. Implementing the plan at one point would have cost $1.2 billion, and it has been scaled down to $660 million. I would propose this question be placed on the 2014 ballot.

If nothing was done, Federal agencies would not approve permits for new construction. New construction creates water and that water must go somewhere like a storm drain—and that requires federal approval. It could also block public infrastructure improvements, such as a bridge or rebuilding of theWater Pollution Control Plant. Coyote Valley and the Almaden reserve are areas that provide ample land for habitat. Building within the city infrastructure is the prudent thing to do, but not if the tax is so high or a burrowing owl is on a parcel within the city existing city infrastructure, like North San Jose. For example, if HCP was in place today San Jose would have had to pay $170,000 fee for the Convention Center expansion. (Convention Center expansion is being paid for by the hotels, which have increased the hotel tax paid by overnight guests.)

The cost, $170,000, may not sound like much since we talk about billions all the time with Federal and State dollars, but at the local level that level of fee could dissuade new development, like the large office building the City Council unanimously approved for Santana Row last month. Another way to look at it is the city of San Jose has removed fees to promote building in downtown and North San Jose, and this new HCP fee would negate this effort.

I’m not sure how things became so disconnected between economic development and providing federal funding to comply with federal regulation. Be sure to ask your elected Federal representative. This topic will be discussed at this week’s council meeting.

Unshackle the Police Reserves

By

San Jose Municipal Code Section 8.12 authorizes the use of the Police Reserves. 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 Department allows 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.

Explore and Enjoy Arts Locally

By

Arts and Culture are words used quite often to describe the vibrancy of cities; particularly big cities looking to attract business, tourists and new residents. City folk have enjoyed arts and culture entertainment for centuries, which has been funded both privately and publicly. It is not uncommon for people to travel out of state and even internationally for festivals that explore various unique arts and culture.

Residents of a particular region will usually travel closer to home to experience arts and culture. For example, people in the Bay Area drive over an hour to San Francisco (SF) to partake in the Arts. For many of those that seek out the Arts in SF, their first thought is not about the city’s crime rate or road conditions but rather about the entertainment. They will spend $20-$40 on gas, their time driving back and forth, $20-$30 to park, and in some places navigate the sidewalks through panhandlers, alcoholics, drug users, drug dealers, etc. to arrive at a venue to be entertained and escape from their daily lives.

I have traveled north many times to see unique art, one-of-a-kind venues and paid handsomely in time and money to experience it. However, I value art closer to home without all the obstacles and safety concerns. Last week, I was able to enjoy the world premiere play, “Death of a Novel.” What a fantastic show with a full house at our own San Jose Repertory Theater. Powerful monologues, witty banter and racy material all in our downtown.

A criticism of the classic Arts like theater and opera is that the audience is mostly geriatric. Well, if you ever have been on the fence about seeing a play, this is the one to see. For those under 50 who may have been turned off or simply not interested in theater, this is a show for you. The play ties in social media, deception, profanity, sex and a story that you are not sure how it will end.

In San Jose, we are very fortunate to live in a place where people have devoted years of their lives providing entertainment for the region bothDowntown and other locations, like the new Renegade Theater Experiment in the Rose Garden.

This week the Zero1 Biennial returns to Downtown displaying art and technology on a grand scale. The last Zero1 Biennial in 2010 attracted 47,000 visitors to Downtown, which resulted in a great crowd, full restaurants and hotel room nights. Zero1 is funded mostly by foundations and corporate sponsors, however, the city of San Jose has allocated $68,000 from the $13.1 million Hotel Tax fund. In past events, ZeroOne artists like the Rockwell Groupare famous for lighting up the City Hall with interactive art comprised of lights.

With all the madness and chaos cities face across the country with reduced revenues and reduced services, this does not stop the individual resident from pursuing their intellectual curiosities or experiencing sheer escapism through entertainment. As humans, we seek many different facets in life beyond shelter and food. One of which is connecting with others in the physical world and enjoying a common experience providing a cultural literacy that we can discuss and relate to one another. In a small farm town it may be a barn dance; in San Jose we have a substantial variety of arts and culture.

If you would like to volunteer at the San Jose Municipal Rose Garden then join me and the Friends of the San Jose Rose Garden this Saturday at 9am. This particular volunteer effort will be done in the memory of Ivan Kolte. Ivan was a 94-year-young San Josean who loved the Rose Garden and passed away recently, joining his deceased wife and high school sweetheart.

Shucking Corn

By

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.