Today is Mayor Reed’s State of the City and it is easy to predict an issue that will be paramount in his speech. Like the swallows returning to Capistrano, the budget woes of the City of San Jose are never far from us. Far from crying wolf, the wolves may be howling too late and not too inappropriately. San Jose has faced multimillion dollar deficits for the last few years. The mayor has decided to try and fix this one quickly, and, he hopes finally, in the next three years. As the front page story in the Mercury News reported yesterday, the mayor has performed quite well on the reforms that he promised the citizens in the last election. It is a refreshing and significant achievement.
Yes, the budget “fix” will take some doing. The usual areas are in consideration: first, taxes; and second, reduction in services or employee compensation. Then there are certain sleight-of-hand transfers from other funds, and construction and conveyance taxes on the capital side that the “experts” recommended. This is the “Cleveland Solution” that many failing cities employ when they move capital improvement monies to day-to-day operations like salary. This is a horrible idea and one that should not receive any consideration. What should be considered is the number of capital projects that we can afford to operate. Now that is worthy of some real thought.
Employee salaries and benefits are a big part of any solution. This must be approached carefully, remembering that the past administration through incompetence and expediency ceded much of the negotiation to the politicians, and chaos and financial recklessness followed. Fairness to the employees must also be mentioned. These are good, hard working and decent people who have received a compact from the city, and it must be complied with. And we must not forget the citizens of San Jose who must also be given a place at this table, since cuts in services and new taxes and fees come at their expense. The knives must be sheathed.
This is not a time for tough and pugnacious talk from public officials or labor leaders. Restraint and responsibility should be the watchwords.
Once again, looking at the utility tax and the sales tax should be the last, and not the first, resort. The people did not cause this debacle—a largely self-inflicted wound—and they should not be made to pay for it. Likewise, the potentially palatable parcel tax should not be high on any list either. It is surely a failure that this group of experts came up with too many unfair and immediately DOA proposals. With a “suspended disbelief,” many expected more (against all experience I was one of them) and were disappointed. I hope for better this morning in the State of the City.
Chuck Reed giving a speech.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
What a useless speech. #1 is right. It was like a high school pep rally when the team is in last place. #1 is right. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. But wait, I am inspired to run out and take the green pledge with Chuck Reed. What a waste of my time.
There’s another piece of this you’re missing, Mr McEnery. Besides “fixing” the financial problems, we need to figure out who overspent and why and serve up accountability.
This means making sure those people don’t move to higher or other offices and do the same damage there. Clearly there are some faces who won’t be around again, but there are plenty of lemons who keep dancing around this town, and plenty of seats for them to fill.
As much as I wasn’t a fan of Ron Gonzales, I have to admit he was one of ELEVEN people on the council during his terms.
Tom – too bad San Jose can’t solve it’s operating deficit the way the American Red Cross is handling theirs – they plan to balance their budget by cutting headquarters staff and regional management which will not effect relief operations and other services they provide. A balanced budget with no cuts to services – now there’s a thought! Obviously Red Cross managers are not protected by ironclad union contracts.
Could someone provide some real data on how the Gonzales administration mishandled budget matters? This seems to be a major emphasis of Reed and McEnery. It may be accurate. I’d just like some facts.
Also, who was Gonzales’ budget director? If there was a problem was it a problem of bad leadership or a bad advisor?
#1 Mark T: You posted your comments at 8:06, but the Mayor did not give his speech until after 8:30. Despite your preconceived ideas it wasn’t a bad speech. Maybe next time you will listen to it before judging it’s contents?
Until the elected and the unions realize that the public employees are supposed to provide services to the citizens, not that the taxpayers are there to provide for the public employee, there is no solution.
Taxpayers, in general, have to provide for their own health and retirement. We do that with programs that we pay for in addition to social security. Why should public employees, many of whom earn much more than those in the private sector, have such a great advantage over those who pay their salaries?
Raising taxes and fees puts the burden on the citizens. The public employees will just ask for an increase and the weak willed so called representitives of the citizens will just cave!
Tom McE was the last orator to occupy the mayor’s office in SJ.
#6, I have heard enough from Mr. Reed in the past that I don’t need to hear anymore in order to arrive at the same conclusion. It would appear that at least one fellow blogger to chime in thus far agrees with my pre-speech assessment.
This town is asleep and adrift. We need a leader who has the ability to energize the community over a given issue, even if it’s about addressing the deficit and not about building a stadium or music hall. Reed simply does NOT have what it takes to get anyone excited about anything.
There’s no denying that whomever succeeded Gonzo would be saddled with the mundane job of leading the clean-up crew, but this town has nailed itself with a double whammy through opting for Reed as that successor. We had other options for defeating Chavez besides Reed but his sunshine gimickery suckered in a lot of fed up voters.
As I’ve requested before, wake me up when it’s time to vote Liccardo in for mayor so we can give 200 E. Santa Clara a desperately needed charisma infusion, get this town energized towards moving forward again and dispense with the ingrained apologetic tone people use when advising they are from San Jose.
#3 makes the good point that Gonzales was one of eleven votes. Yes, most of the council just rubber stamped anything that the administration put before them. BUT, if you talked to any of the city employees at the time (as I did) they would have told you that the Gonzales Administration dictated policy decisions to staff.
Months before the vote was taken to approve the city hall project, then Councilmember Reed called for an alternative sites study to see if cheaper alternatives could be found. Gonzales and his staff wrote up a memo that was pushed at the Rules Committe meeting. The memo called for the alternative sites study to proceed, but with certain requirements, one of which dictated that any alternative project would have to incorporate components of the current outline. Gonzales’s memo, which was approved by the Rules Committe, essentially guranteed that the city hall construction would proceed as planned. The alternative sites study ended up being a charade and a waste of time and taxpayer money. (The study was a whitewash…staff applied the high costs of the Meier designed building to their “analysis” of the existing city hall site). AND, to this day, the Mercury News has failed to report this story!
Pete Campbell
the mayor’s speech was a joke. Nothing to get excited about. How do you increase the economy without even one new idea.
Wake me up when we start to become a city.
Mark T #9: I don’t want an exciting city government. I want a city government that works, that provides public safety and well constructed/well maintained infrastructure. Ya want excitement, Mark, move to SF and boogie with Gavin.
It never ceases to amaze me what an instant gratification society we live in. No one wants to walk through the hard work, or learn from past mistakes; they just want everything right now, regardless of the damage or price later on. Geech!
For those of you with selective, or short memories, Mayor Reed has been fighting over spending since his first day as a Councilperson. He has been the lone “No” vote on many issues that had the Mayor and Council listened to him, would have saved us MILLLIONS in law suits, and left us with money to repair streets, swimming pools, and lots of other necessities. We sure as hell would never have wasted millions on that cold albatross called City hall, if he had his way.
As to the Mayor being boring, clearly you don’t know him very well to speak like that about him. He is very warm; he cares very much about San Jose and it’s citizens, the environment, business, education, animals, and spent years as an attorney fighting for people’s Civil Rights. He has a beautiful, out going wife who works with cancer patients. He has lovely adult children who work in fields that contribute to our well being, and safety. If that is boring to you, then go watch Jerry Springer or Dr. Phil and get your drama fix, I’ll stick with Mayor Reed any day~
JMO, I want both. Without a charismatic leader you can expect the level of voter apathy to keep trending upward.
Chuck Reed couldn’t inspire his way out of a paper bag. I couldn’t have been less interested in listening to him speak today. Had it been a mayor up there with the ability to generate interest whenever he speaks, I’d have likely figured out a way to attend the speech or listen to a rebroadcast.
IF, three years from now we have smooth streets and presentable parks as a result of Reed’s efforts, I will give credit where it’s due. I seriously doubt I’ll end up having to do so.
It will be very difficult for Mayor Reed to end the structural deficit. City employees will not want to give up any pay or benefits. The solution that I see happening is a combination of small fee and tax increases coupled with minor service cuts in all areas. One hope would be if the city collected more revenue simply by having more companies do business in San Jose.
Many union contracts are expiring in the near future. Although, the last few years we have had low inflation, this year inflation has risen due to food and energy costs. The unions will probaby use this inflation data in their negotiations with the city, even though their raises in the past have been greater than the inflation rate.
Does anyone know why when BART was designed, a wider gauge was chosen over standard gauge tracks?
Mark T –
So, would you prefer the Gonzales administration? He was certainly dynamic…
I certainly don’t think Mayor Reed is boring. Focused? Yes. Driven? Yes. No-nonsense? Yes. Boring? No. I think we had enough drama on the Council over the past 10 years, with the Cisco IT Bid scandal, the Norcal Garbage bid scandal, the problems with Terry Gregory, the Jerry Silva Scandal, and former Mayor Ron Gonzales. I may not agree with everything Mayor Reed does, but I do think that when you look at everything he has done so far, that he has done a good job. And if his speaking style is to the point and a little dry, well, then, that is fine by me.
Mark,
If the mayor can get us in the black in three years he deserves all the credit we can give him. We handed him a check book with no money in the bank the day he took over. In addition we handed him a pot full of debt that was built by spend free mayors before him.
You go down and try to buy a new car with poor credit and an ibility to tell the bank how you will pay the bank?
George #15: when those union contracts expire, the city needs to seriously work on the work rules that let many city employees lean on their shovels and brooms a lot. The output expected of them would get most people fired in the private sector.
Mark #14—they don’t often go together. Look @ JFK—very charismatic, gave the nation a feel good boost. But his actual record of accomplishments as Pres.—nothing to write home about.
We need a plain, hard-working, dedicated guy right now. That’s Chuck.
Are we really so shallow that we judge our leaders by how charismatic they are or how much oratorical firepower they can muster? Yeah, I know we are, but I hoped that the folks on SJI were more sophisticated than that. Guess I was wrong.
So what if Reed is not super exciting or flashy? Although I am not a fanatic supporter of his I would take him any day of the week over his disastrous predecessor.
If you want big projects and fancy programs you are not dealing in reality. Reed could continue the ways of the past by pushing for new buildings but we see the danger in that—the previous Mayor did that and now we can’t staff or maintain them.
So, for those of you who judge our city based on whether or not the Mayor makes an exciting speech, prepare to be continually disappointed. For the rest of us who are looking for a well run, fiscally sound city, I think we will be much happier than we have been in a long, long, time.
#9. “I have heard enough from Mr. Reed in the past that I don’t need to hear anymore in order to arrive at the same conclusion.”
I have poured enough lighter fluid onto a burning barbecue in the past that I conclude absolutely nothing bad can…WOOOSH!!!
That’s the trouble with intellectual short cuts Mr. T, you can easily get burned.
#19 Ann,
Very well said !
I hope as chairman of the BART Board of Directors, our Mayor Reed in all his widom, takes a hard look at the cost to build and pay for the annual operating cost to run the BART System from San Jose to the East Bay.
Experts are putting the cost of the build out to be over $10 billion without any guarentee of total costs. In addition, these same people are estimating the annual operating cost to operate BART to the East Bay between $150,000 to $180,000.
Lets hope that Mayor reed has the wisdom to take a serious look at BART costs. Mayor Gonzales was trying to push this BART project through too.
Compare these numbers to the cost to build City Hall, plus the cost to build the new library and funding the race downtown look like peanuts.
Lets hope Mayor Reed takes a serious look at all costs for BART.
OK, I don’t like Reed. That won’t likely change. I held my nose and voted for him against Cindy but hated the idea that I was even having to choose between those two. My vote for him was a stop-gap measure to derail the Gonzo-Chavez madness and nothing more.
The simplistic assumption that I ever approved of Ron Gonzales is way off base. Gonzo’s practice of trying way too hard to make something of this town was an embarassment. And I hardly consider him a charismatic great speaker. His ignorance shone through ever time he opened his mouth.
#15,
I could be wrong, but I believe BART’s wider gauge was due in part because a line was supposed to cross the Golden Gate Bridge into Marin County; perhaps for stability purposes. Obviously, a Golden Gate/Marin line was never built. Sounds like Mr. Reed’s speech was a yawner; no major initiatives or major announcements for the citizens of this city to get excited about. On the other hand, I guess “boring” is what this city needs right now. It also looks like the downtown Sobrato Tower may be vacant for the long haul, with Oracle buying out BEA Systems. So much for adding another corporate HQ downtown…the sad saga of fizzle continues (hopefully I’m wrong on this one).
Mark,
Mr. Gonzales was Mr. BART ! All the information we`re learning about on San Jose Inside, all the questions we now have, good questions, have never come out before. Do you think he was aware of everything?
Lets hope our new Mayor gets these questions and opens his eyes and prevents us from making a tragic mistake. If the County fails, all the cities in SCC will fail. Things will get messy around here.
Try to imagine all bus service and light rail service comming to a STOP because VTA got in financial trouble beyond the financial trouble they are already in…
Hey, AA #19—don’t judge us all by Mark T’s desire for a media savy, charismatic, person. He’s the only guy espousing that position, near as I can tell.
Would I like the wunderkind Mark proposes—with both nstyle and substance? YUP. But we ain’t got it. So, if I had to choose between a Gavin or a Chuck to get us out of the mess we’ve been placed in by Gonzo/Guerra and the TRULY PATHETIC city council they ran like a bunch of kids scared by the bully in the schoolyard, I’ll take Chuck.
To this day I cannot understand how anybody with half a brain and half a spine could have been intimidated by the likes of Gonzo/Guerra…yet it happened, if you believe the tales of force and intimidation that have leaked out over the years. Those two are just not scary guys to me. And yet, there was no-one who stood up to them. And some of those people are still in office..even scarier.
I guess that’s what’s bound to happen when you get a couple of focused people with nobody to stand up to them but one trick pony soccer moms and political wannabes elected by districts where you can win with 7000 votes.
Richard #21—the numbers you cite as annual operating costs have to be missing at least 3 zeros. $150k gets you one driver and one switchperson.
Whatever combination of abilities one person or the next wants to see in their mayor notwithstanding, it all boils down to this: The mess we are in and the mayor we ended up with are both courtesy of Ron Gonzales. I’m not saying Chuck is the bad guy here. That title is Gonzo’s and Gonzo’s alone.
Mark and Tom McEnery,
San Jose needs to wake up. We need revenue so we can do any visionary glamorus things in this town. “Revenue building is the key”. We need Hotels, we need Shopping Centers, we need to stop the neighboring cities from taking our car dealships like Piercy Toyota.
We are helping Milpitas and Warm Springs building Hotels close to our city limits. Building BART to the east bay is like shooting our selves in the foot !
Milpitas has plans to build a intermodal station for BART, Tthey already have plans for a ” MAJOR hotel” at this station close to the Great Mall. “yes another Major hotel” and just out of our city limits. This is revenue lost for San Jose. A major Hote with 60% occupancy can bring in $1/12 to $2 million a year in revenue to our city.
There are 29 hotels right on our boarders in Milpitas and Santa Clara. Do the math on how much income we are missing.
These hotels even call themselves San Jose Hotels ie; Shearton san Jose, Hilton San Jose… and they are in Milpitas.
We need revenue. Building Bart along this coridor on I-880 is attracting hotels outside our City. Milpitas advertizes they are just 5 miles from the San Jose Airport, Warm Springs advertizes being 11 miles from the San Jose Airport. Warm Springs already has a Marriott just as big as our Mariott with other hotels clustered around it. We are our own enemy.
The “CONFIDENCE MAN”, he was there full of smiles, working the Mayors breakfast “State of the City” presentation. He worked the floor well.
Tom… Was that million or billion or gazillion?
RZ 29,
There will also be a Major League ballpark (along with a MAJOR hotel, condo’s, and larger version of Santana Row) at Warm Springs, Fremont. Kind of a good and bad thing if you think about it; Major League baseball much closer to San Jose/Silicon Valley and our city’s name on the A’s jerseys (maybe). On the other hand, Cisco Field and the related development could be the final dagger in downtown San Jose’s dream of ever being a destination place. You think the current Santana Row hurt the downtown…
Should a compromise be necessary, Run the light rail from Milpitas to Warm Springs.
If the BART train crosses one inch over the Santa Clara County line, our membership cost to join the BART System is $50 million a year for life and it`s GUARENTEED . This item has the ability to Bankrupt VTA, because it`s GUARENTEED money.
Total operating cost for San Jose BART is estimated to be $150 to $170 million per year.This includes the $50million per year Guarenteed.
Light Rail to Warm Springs from Milpitas, and we save $50 million and VTA.
ACE train goes right by the new proposed Ball Park in Fremont.
Well Tony, it’s nice to see that on THIS blog, you’re a little more grounded in reality. I mean, at the other place you wouldn’t be caught dead using the word “maybe” when talking about the A’s being named for San Jose.
Tom,
I believe a large group of the readers of your Blog would like to hear from assortment of speakers in your “guest bloggers” site speaking to both sides of the BART to the East Bay from San Jose project, there is two sides. All we are fed by the local Media, the Merc and the Metro is the “pro BART side of the story”.
We`d like to hear from guest bloggers like :
Don Gage,Greg Perry,Eugene Bradley, Ed Rast. Can you make this happen, it would be nice of you? Your thoughts, please.
Another speaker might address the “special BART police force” we will need in the south bay. BART hasn`t got the $ money to hire these officers, San Jose would have to foot the bill. Where is this money going to come from ? Maybe the City Manager or the Chief opf Police could speak on this subject on the “Guest Blogger” site?
San Francisco/Oakland has 206 BART Special Police Officers with a Special police Chief. The Chief is asking for more to staff two new departments within the BART police; (1) a special bycycle unit for BART parking lots and (2) a undercover unit to ride the BART trains to catch terrorists, drug dealers and muggers.
San Jose presently needs 50 new police officers desperatly. Thats 5 new officers per district to handle our problems in San Jose. The Mayor says we don`t have the money to do this. We are very short on enforcement officers. Last nite January 20th, we had another “hit and run” accident in Willow Glen on Bird Avenue, last week we had an accident on Curtner Ave and a burgulary in Willow Glen . The home owner coming home watched the burgulars cut across his lawn in their truck with his furniture as he tried to stop them.
We are starting 2008 with more serious problems.
How about the Chief of Police as a guest blogger?
I second Richard Zappelli’s request from some critical discussion of the BART to SJ project. The pro-BART forces continue to get non-critical coverage in the media, and no elected officials are questioning the project, save Mr. Perry who left the VTA BOD.
33-Richard, 34-HJ
50 new SJPD officers and more. . .
San Jose First or BART?
If $50mil/yr for BART membership stayed in San Jose, look what it could do:
—50 new officers ($7.5mil)
—$20mil-for-30yrs to streamline and make Green San Jose’s transportation system and infrastructure.
—40 new Fire and EMT folks ($4.8mil)
—50 gardeners, maint etc. ($4.5mil)
—17 to the staff to include trails and arborist ($1.5mil)
—traffic calming equipment etc. ($2.7mil)
—Trails: ($3.0mil /yr.)
—$1.5mil/yr to upgrade and maintain city pools
—25 folks to staff and supervise them ($1.5mil)
—20-25 library staff longer ($1.5mil)
—15 folks to Planning, Building and Code Enforcement ($1.5mil)
(1) staff additions note above are one time adds and supported yr/yr by the $30mil/yr
(2) Capital or equipment numbers repeat each year.
It’s strange that any reporting or public discussion of increased taxes for BART are void of options or choices like this. Why is that?
Richard #33 would like to see:” a undercover unit to ride the BART trains to catch terrorists, drug dealers and muggers.”
Richard, good choice starting out with “terrorists”. Ain’t no funding to catch drug dealers or muggers, but terroristas—the $$$$ are endless from the Feds.
I believe I saw David D. #34’s numbers on another earlier post, but they are worth cramming down the council’s throat. We NEED those expeditures far more than a dept. to oversee public art.
JMOC… re: David D. #35
Yes, you saw them before. It was a rough cut at what could be done with $50mil /yr should San Jose be tapped for such an amount for BART. No one has thrown rocks at it or stuck an alternative up on the board. So lets move on with the logic here and see what that invites…
starting with 50 new Officers ($7.5mil/yr) vs. 15% of BART membership dues
— a big step toward safer neighborhoods, streets and city vs. dues to other bay area cities and their BART costs and problems
— 10 more Officers for each Council District vs. ???
— to deal with and counter gang activities vs. ???
— to mitigate some of the OT vs. ???
— to help offset the classes near retirement vs. ???
— to help calm traffic and quiet hot spots vs. ???
— to improve neighborhood response times vs. ???
How would Chief Davis weigh in on this if given the choice?
How would the City Manager view this choice
How would each Council member vote given the choice of SJ vs. BART?
It all comes out of our pocket one way or the other?
Any thoughts?
let me add to my post #36: We NEED those expeditures [laid out in post #35]far more than a dept. to oversee public art, or $100k for signs for a 2 block business district where you picked a name most people apparently hate.
JMOC #36 Moving on… $20mil/yr of the $50mil/yr
How could $20mil/yr improve; streamline and Green the SJ/VTA/SCC transit system and relieve gridlock?
— strengthen VTA financially
— add CNG, hybrid or electric busses to the fleet
— add green-buss express routes to relieve gridlock (w/incentives)
— build a solar charging farm for an electric fleet
— pump solar generated power into the Light Rail system
— beef up security on the system and parking lots
— expand L/R into new north valley expansion
— and other
How far would this go to improve the quality of life here in San Jose?
How would such improvements help attract new business?
Would this jump start local jobs and spur new growth?
How soon could new revenue fire up this agenda?
That’s just 40% of the annual BART membership fee.
Unlike membership fees, this stays here and starts quickly.
Thoughts? Comments?
JMOC #36 …. that leaves $22.5 mil/yr of the $50mil.
Next let’s add 40 new Fire and EMT folks ($4.8mil/yr); and . . .
— better staff south valley and outlying areas
— be better prepared for high risk areas
— staff and train to backfill retiring staff
— beef up disaster response and relief program
— strengthen community education and prevention programs
— help offset current health care and retirement benefits
— and other
That’s only 9.6% of the annual BART membership fee.
Unlike membership fees, this too stays here and starts quickly.
JMOC #36 That takes care of $32.3mil/yr
Next let’s add 50 park folks ($4.5mil/yr):
— that’s 5 per Council District
— to spruce up and better maintain parks
— better deal with graffiti
— maintain new parts and playgrounds
— and more
That’s only 9% of the annual BART membership fee.
Unlike membership fees, this too stays here, starts quickly and immediately add to the quality of life in San Jose, (not other counties).
What Council person would not like to have their District look better.
It’s all out of our pocket… for San Jose or that link to Oakland?
JMOC #36 That takes care of $36.8mil/yr
Next let’s add 17 folks to DOT, trails & arborist staff ($1.5mil):
— mostly field personnel for traffic engineering
— trail maintenance and repair
— sidewalk and tree maintenance
— ride-of-way beautification projects
— traffic calming and safety programs
That’s only 3% of the annual BART membership fee.
And this too stays here, starts quickly and immediately adds to the quality of life.
What Council person would not support this?
JMOC #36 Well… that takes care of $38.3mil/yr.
Next let’s add $2.7mil/yr for traffic calming assets:
— that’s $270mil per Council District /yr for ever
— to equip and calm neighborhood traffic
— to smooth and make safer major city corridors
— make SJ more bike and pedestrian friendly
— and other
That’s only 5.4% of the annual BART membership fee.
And this too stays here, starts quickly and continues to grow with the city.
Judging from the turnout for the City-wide input meeting last year, this would be a welcome addition to the current DOT effort.
JMOC #36 Well… now we’re up to $41mil/yr. that would stay here, be put to immediate use and improve the quality of life. And this to would hopefully help the City attract new business.
Next let’s add $3mil/yr for Trails Acquisition
— it’s green
— it’s healthy
— it beautifies
— is great for visitors that jog, hike, bike and enjoy the outdoors
— it’s a great way to show the city
— and enhances quality neighborgoods
— enhances property values
— and other
And is only 6% of the annual BART membership fee.
Johnmichae,
Can VTA support BART`s anual operating cost estimated to be between $150 million to $17 million per year. Remember too, there is a legal trigger, VTA has signed a legal GUARENTEE, to make their payments on time or BART has the right to attach the VTA bank account. This attachment would bring the whole VTA System to a hault, (no buses,no light rail, no trains, no payroll funds) until BART is satisfied.
This GUARENTEE was signed in 2000 and goes into effect the day that we begin to build BART. The $50million a year for life begins right away. Where is VTA going to get the money to pay the operating cost and continue to pay their current operating costs to operate buses, trains, light rail, repair roads. This is the “HARD QUESTION”. My bet is the current Board of Directors of VTA hasn`t asked themselves this question !
Two studies, one by USC and the other by UCSD conducted in 2005 put the cost at that time (2005) @ $8.5 billion. Since then VTA has guarenteed the Sierra Club that they would build the last 4.8 mile stretch by tunneling underground. San Francisco dug a whole in the ground, they did not tunnel. This cost has to be added to the $8.5 billion. Add to the 2005 build out cost the cost to “RETRO FIT THE TUNNEL” as San Francisco had to do @ a additional cost of $1.5 billion. Add to the cost all the cost increases for materials and labor that have gone up since the 2005 study was compleeted.
VTA is already in trouble financially. Can VTA, and Santa Clara County afford to take on this huge financial task and survive. Is Bankruptcy in the plan should VTA run out of funds, if so do we have to pick up the obligation, the cities of Santa Clara County.
Johnmichael, who is going to hire and pay for the BART police, San Jose ? Who is going to build the huge parking lots BART requires to be successful. How is VTA going to purchase the additional buses to support the BART trains?
Johnmichael, think about all the high density residential housing that is under construction. All these residents drive a car, they will be trying to get on our freeways that are already gridlocked. Where is VTA going to find the money to fix our gridlocked freeways here in Santa Clara County. How are they going to get the money to repair our roadways.
Johnmichael, VTA is planning to build “3”-“20 floor” high rise condos and apartments on their property located on the corner of San Carlos ans Sunol Street in San Jose just one block from Linciln Avenue in Willow Glen. I`m going to a meeting this Saturday morning to hear about this project.
As David D said:…” the City,County,State and federal Government are all out of money” ! DOES VTA KNOW A SOURCE FOR ALL THESE FUNDS ?
WE NEED TO ASK OUR LEADERS IN GOVERNMENT HOW THEY ARE GOING TO DO ALL THIS…
Johnmichael re: #36
Terrorist… how would you like to be at the BART Station under Union Square Under Macy`s San Francisco with all those people when a terrorist bomb goes off. BART underground station in San Francisco would become a mass grave. Should BART police get their plain clothes under cover special police team ? Do we want to build one of those BART underground stations in downtown San Jose. Gonzales is gone, should there be a explosion underground San Jose we can`t blame Gonzales.
Tom,
My question for you on Guest Bloggers, see #33.
Possible ?
#46 correction,
BART estimated operating cost per year, $150 million to $170 million….
Did anyone but me hear the story yesterday on KLIV that VTA has the HIGHEST approval rating of any government body in Santa Clara County? Surely I must have been dreaming. If not, far more people than we ever suspected are feeling the effects of exposure to lead.
Richard #46: why are you asking me all these questions? I’m against BART
David 37-45—Have you sent these suggestions to the mayor and council? If not, why not. Chuck was soliciting budget suggestions.
Richard #47—the chances of my being blown up by a terorist bomb are significantly less than my chances of being struck by lightning.
JMOC #36 Ok, that’s $44/mil/yr
Spend the remaining $6 mil/yr to:
— upgrade, maintain and supervise City Pools
— keep libraries open longer and fund more learning programs
— improve planning, building and code enforcement. . .
All of which should enhance:
> our quality of life
> aid in reducing delinquency and gang violence
> make our city more attractive to new business
$50 mil/yr membership fee for BART (not to include construction and other costs) or . . .
$50mil/yr that stays here, improves QoL, helps SJ attract new business, improves transportation, provides local jobs and starts year one.