The Malaise at City Hall

Today, Scott Herhold penned an opinion piece for the Mercury News in which he identified timidity as the cause of some of the malaise at City Hall. While he has a point, I was stunned that he chose this topic when there are so many other causes of San Jose's problems which are far more significant than timidity. Following is my response:

Scott, I am sorry, but it is not timidity from which emanates the fumes which fuel City Hall. No, that stench you detect is the reek of the excrement with which the city's manager and elected officials have treated San Jose's citizens like mushrooms (keep them in the dark and feed them...). Now, before one - or all - of them goes and files a complaint against me for the above assertion, allow me to lay out the following facts in its support:

1. Advocates of Measures V and W asserted that their passage was necessary to preserve public safety positions and help balance the budget. 8 months later, we saw yet another budget deficit and the layoff of 66 officers.

2. Debra Figone asserted that the city could not afford to apply for the COPS grant and attempt to preserve 53 of the 66 aforementioned police positions over the course of the four year commitment that acceptance of the grant would constitute - a financial obligation totaling $9.858 million in year 4. And yet. by process of simple mathematics, logic and observation, I have repeated shown how all 53 positions could have been preserved, thereby preserving the $9.3 million investment in training which those 53 officers represent.


a. Eliminate the disbursement of $2.46 million in grants paid out of the general fund for each of the four years of the duration of the grant. (I even offered suggestions for which grants would be responsible to eliminate)


b. Simply set aside $2.46 million for each of the four years or 0.3% of the $800 million general fund


c. Do nothing for years 1-3 and simply recognize that well more than 53 officers will have retired by the time year 4 rolled around and that 53 officers would simply account for attrition by retirement.

3. Mayor Reed has repeatedly asserted that pensions and benefits for employees is bankrupting the city or causing the budget deficit and then squarely placed his crosshairs on public safety. And yet, when I directly challenged this assertion by pointing out that many other cities pay their public safety employees as well or better than does San Jose AND maintains a higher number of public safety employees per capita than does San Jose he has stated either a. that he doesn't know how he does this or b. observed that these other cities have higher revenue per capita than does San Jose. This was the result of a question I posed to him in one of his fireside chats on KLIV.

San Jose's problems are not, in the main, caused by its municipal employees, their wages or their benefits. No, it's problems are caused by a cumbersome system of rules and laws which are excessively intrusive, and toxic to businesses, by a body of leadership which, in the main, cares more about ambition, is excessively avaricious, irrelevant, inexperienced, or checking the mail for an indictment. In order to change this, San Jose needs new leadership, a simpler, more efficient system of rules and government, and a far more friendly business environment than presently exists.