Oliverio for Supervisor 2018

Independent - Transparent - Fiscally Responsible

We Pay Twice for Affordable Housing

By

In past blogs I have expressed my concern about the cost to our city of too much housing. Specifically, housing that does not pay its own share of revenue. One example I have pointed out—and constantly been the lone vote against—is affordable housing.

We run the daily operations of our city with tax revenue. The city does not write paychecks signed “goodwill” or “number-one provider of affordable housing,” but rather with dollars backed by tax revenues. So when we add to the housing stock by approving, for example, an affordable housing project that does not pay property tax, road-paving fees and only 50 percent of park fees, it is a net loss for our city. Therefore existing residents subsidize city services for the new residents.

Annual property taxes in San Jose are needed to pay ongoing salaries and benefits of employees. Road-paving fees go towards paving streets in San Jose. If you ride a bicycle or drive a car you know that we need every dollar. Park fees allow for new parks or increasing the size of current parks so we do not wear out the existing park infrastructure in established neighborhoods.  For years developers were exempted from paying park fees for affordable housing projects which created more residents but not enough open space. However last year with the support of the city council I managed to get it changed to where developers must now pay half the park fees that market-rate housing pays.

The other item of interest is that affordable housing generates extraordinary calls for service from our police.  Attached is a snapshot of data for eight affordable housing developments in San Jose and the calls for police service. Since there are more calls for service around these affordable housing projects, over time our police department may schedule more police in this area to manage those calls. This may translate to less police coverage in other areas of San Jose, perhaps where you live.  In addition, our fire department receives more medical-related calls, and again there’s no tax revenue to pay for the employees.

So we pay twice. Once, by exempting taxes and fees. Twice, by higher use of city services than existing residents. (Also, most of these projects were financed with RDA funds, and the State of California mandates that 20 percent of that money be spent on affordable housing. And many of these projects were put in places zoned for jobs and not housing.)

Out of the many suggestions I have made on this topic I believe affordable housing developments that have too many calls for service should hire an off-duty officer and/or ambulance to be there on site.

Here is a link to 730 police calls on eight housing developments, among some 11,000 units built.

On another topic, one of my favorite Downtown events starts Tuesday night, The Cinequest Film Festival. Check it out at Cinequest.org.

Related to cinema I obtained a documentary film about urban parks directly from the filmmaker called The Olmstead Legacy.  Monday, March 7 at 6:30PM will be the premiere showing in San Jose at City Hall. Find out more about The Olmstead Legacy here. The film will be followed by a discussion on urban parks. The event is near capacity; please email me if you want to reserve one of the remaining seats at Pierluigi.Oliverio@SanJoseCA.gov

Finally, the bipartisan Little Hoover Commission, an independent state oversight agency, made its recommendation to Governor Brown about pensions last week:

Read the Feb. 24, 2011 Little Hoover Commission Report here.

2011 City of San Jose Community Budget Survey

By

The City of San Jose contracted with a public opinion organization to conduct a telephone poll of 1,000 San Jose residents. Residents will be asked survey questions about the budget and city services from Jan 13 to Jan 17.

The results of the phone survey will be shared in February. Please note I received a draft of the survey and some of the questions have been edited.

Since only 1,000 people will get a call out of one million residents, I wanted to provide an opportunity for you to partake in the survey via the internet.

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/RG9LCPN

This survey closes Jan 30.
If you appreciate urban parks than consider attending the San Jose premiere of The Olmstead Legacy film. March 7 at City Hall. For more info click here:http://tinyurl.com/OlmstedLegacy

Civil Service Rules

By

The City of San Jose has adopted Civil Service Rules that state what is and what is not allowed in regards to employment. The City Charter allows for changes to Civil Service Rules by a Council vote, and does not necessarily require a city-wide election.

SECTION 1103. Civil Service Rules; Manner of Adoption.

Civil Service Rules for the Classified Service shall be adopted, and may from time to time be repealed or amended, by ordinance of the Council. Upon adoption, Civil Service Rules shall have the force and effect of law.

The Council may adopt, repeal or amend any Civil Service Rule for the Classified Service, provided it first receives from the Civil Service Commission a report or recommendation with respect to the proposed new Rule, if a new Rule is proposed to be adopted, or with respect to the proposed repeal or amendment of an existing Rule if an existing Rule is proposed to be repealed or amended; provided, however, that if the Civil Service Commission refuses or fails to submit to the Council a report or recommendation on any proposed new Rule, or proposed repeal or amendment of any existing Rule, within ninety (90) days from and after the date the Council requests such a report or recommendation, the Council may adopt such new Rule or repeal or amend such existing Rule, without first receiving a report or recommendation thereon from the Civil Service Commission.

The years ahead for local government will be tough, as property tax revenues will continue to be low and the true costs of pensions are revealed.  If layoffs are inevitable, then let’s examine the current system of layoffs by seniority.

The current method means we lose some of the most productive people and create a large age gap if/when we are in the position to hire down the road. Instead, perhaps we should look to see if there is an alternative that might involve employee performance as well as seniority. Maybe only lay off employees who are evaluated as “needing improvement” before laying off productive employees with less seniority. Or if two employees have nearly equal seniority, leave some allowance for merit—such as education, training, evaluations and certifications—to be used in the final determination.

Also, we should explore allowing those that are closer to retirement the ability to choose on their own accord to retire early in a way that would still provide the savings to balance the budget. Employees with more seniority are paid more than those with less seniority, so a change may allow fewer layoffs of city employees that provide services to residents.

I believe the Civil Service Commission, chaired by Bill Brill, business representative for IBEW union Local 425, should review and give their recommendation to the City Council in 90 days per the City Charter.

Thanks to Friends of the San Jose Rose Garden who hosted a great volunteer event on Saturday. Many unpaid volunteers braved the cold to help keep the park looking great. Special thanks to Terry Reilly, Beverly Rose Hopper and Myles Tobin for the heavy lifting.

Click this link for a short video of Saturday’s volunteer event at the San Jose Rose Garden.

Choose San Jose

By

San Jose is currently looking to find a Director of Economic Development.  As The City embarks on this search, what qualities do you feel this person should have? Should they have a background of some particular flavor like commercial real estate, a housing developer, former elected official, lobbyist, economist, academic, small business, large business, tech background, etc? Should they be currently employed at another city? Should it be a local city or further away? Should it be a young person with a limited track record but strong potential or someone with a strong track record making San Jose their final stop?

All cities need planning. However, any plan, no matter what the plan, is subject to criticism, especially in San Jose. I think collectively there are a lot of ideas out there and not all of them new but sometimes the criticism rises higher then positive thoughts. Kim Walesh, our interim Director of Economic Development is certainly qualified. However, she is not interested in this permanent position. So the quest is on for this new unnamed person.

Does any particular person come to mind who would be good for this job? Would anyone high-caliber candidate want the job? The position pays approximately $200K in total compensation. (216 people made over $200K working for the City of San Jose in 2009.)

The City of San Jose has rolled out a new website showing our positive attributes for companies considering expansion or moving to San Jose. In past blogs I have mentioned a few companies relocating to San Jose such as Maxim, Atheros and other smaller VC-funded companies, which is good news for San Jose. Below is the new “Choose San Jose” website which is partially the work of the Office of Economic Development. What do you think of it?

http://www.choosesanjose.com/

I do not believe an economic director will be the salvation for any given city as much of the success or failure is dictated by the movement of capital and the free market. Yet having a strong communicator that makes sure each piston of the City’s engine is hitting when the free market brings San Jose an opportunity would be ideal.  In the meantime, if a strong economic director can convince elected leaders to not convert industrial land to housing that would be great start.

Synchronized Swimming

By

Last year, the council was faced with cutting the aquatics program down from ten pools to two due to the budget deficit. Stuck between a rock and a hard place the council invoked the “Unique Service Purchase” clause.

4.12.235 Unique services purchases.
The procurement authority may initiate a procurement for unique professional or other services where the procurement authority determines that an unusual or unique situation exists that make the application of the requirements for competitive procurement of a services agreement contrary to the public interest. Any special procurement under this section shall be made with such competition as is practicable under the circumstance. A written determination of the basis for the procurement and for the selection of the particular contractor shall be included by the Procurement authority in the department files.

Simply stated, this allows city staff the flexibility to outsource. In this case, the aquatics program was outsourced to both non-profit and for-profit groups. This simple action allowed the city to open seven additional pools for a total of nine pools instead of two that were budgeted.

At the Dec. 14 council meeting, staff reported back to the council on the results of the aquatics program. Residents gave the program high marks, with 91 percent rating the service as positive. In addition 1,000 more swimmers used the pools this summer over last summer. Staff said that outsourcing of the pools was “seamless.”

I think it is great we were able to give residents services they enjoy but without the traditional cost.

The City continues to cover maintenance and utility costs, however with multi-year contracts I believe we can get most of these costs covered as well, and even extend the swim season.  This is a positive example that outsourcing can provide services to residents. This is a positive example that outsourcing can provide services to residents.

Congratulations to Maxim Semiconductor for purchasing a building in North San Jose. They will soon be relocating their 1,200 employees and corporate headquarters to San Jose. The City of San Jose through the Office of Economic Development offered $500,000 in business assistance programs. Luckily the City of San Jose was prudent and has a little money put aside for economic development.

Is Employment Lands Framework Dead?

By

Tax Base Erosion Night lived up to its name last Tuesday at the Council meeting as a truck drove through the Employment Lands Framework. Council voted 8-3 to amend the General Plan and allow new townhouses instead of reserving land for jobs next to Santana Row. Thank you to Rose Herrera and Sam Liccardo for voting to hold the line and retain our tax base.
In 2007, I was on a bus tour of San Jose with the General Plan Task Force. I thought the bus ride was more like the “Damage is Done Tour.” Driving past parcel after parcel of land rezoned from jobs to housing. Just when you think that we can learn from the past we turn a blind eye and continue doing the same old thing. After the vote was cast, I made a second motion that would have required that an office building be built at the same time as the housing rather than … Some Day … but that was voted down 8-3 as well.

To learn more, watch the video of the Tuesday, Dec. 7 council meeting, agenda item 10.3 — or advance by clicking to the 5th Hour 41st Minute (5:41).

Here is what I suggest if you’re interested in making money:

Step 1: Locate land designated for employment and get it under contract.
Step 2: Hire a lobbyist.
Step 3: Provide drawings of your future development that include kids with balloons.
Step 4: Divide the parcel for a … Some Day … office building on a small portion of the property.
Step 5: Require housing go first on the large portion of the property.
Step 6: Obtain affirmative vote from Council.
Step 7: Sell your entitlement to a home builder and fly to Hawaii (SJC please).

Today the Council will have a study session on Medical Marijuana. I believe the Council should implement Measure U which passed with 78.3 percent of the vote. Therefore, any medical cannabis facility should provide a third party financial audit to our Finance department and start paying a gross receipts tax.