Well it was certainly a busy week with the Council meeting, budget meetings and committee meetings. This weekend I spent time with the SJPD Metro Unit clearing a homeless encampment, and I observed Fire Station 7 putting out a car fire late Saturday night.
Instead of writing a blog this week I spent my time preparing a survey for you about the budget deficit facing the city of San Jose. The link below will allow you to get a glimpse of some the decisions that must be made. Personally I believe we should not lay off city employees that provide services to our residents but rather make structural changes to our city pension plans and fully fund core services first.
As you review the survey keep Section 807 in mind from the City Charter that lists our core services.
Section 807: Administrative Organization; Other Departments. The following Charter departments are hereby established: A Police Department, a Fire Department, a Public Works Department, a Parks and Recreation Department, a Personnel Department, a Planning Department, an Airport Department and a Library Department.
Your input is extremely valuable and I would like to see some of the choices you would make. This survey will close June 7 and I will the share the results afterwards.
Here is the survey link:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=bRmrEkMutPaRNDzl3Q3GRQ_3d_3d
Pierluigi, generally a good survey, and I’ll finish it once I understand how to answer #75, 76, & 78.
For instance, #78 says “restructure warehouse operations….” Does “Absolutely do not cut” in this instance mean don’t restructure warehouse operations, or don’t remove this proposal from the list?
Also, regarding #14, eliminate a Therapeutic Treatment Specialist at Grace Community Center, saving $104K. Does this affect the county subsidy for GCC?
At least my council member, Mr. Oliverio is trying to address budget issues. Chuck Reed is out trying to survey Lew Wolff for his opinion on how to run the city. Hey, Mayor Reed, when are you going to focus on our city services and not servicing Lew?
Pierluigi:
Great survey. Thank you for providing a convenient forum for those of us who work for a living to provide input. Keep up the good work.
Colin McCarthy
Pierluigi,
Thanks for putting up this survey. It defiantly gives me a different perspective of ways to address San Jose’s budget deficit.
Like you I agree that the city should avoid layoffs, however, should the unions not agree to concessions then the ideas included in your survey are a good starting point.
P.O.: in question 91, what does “tax $100 million in bonds” mean? Did you mean to say “issue $100 million in bonds”?
#72—It’s CapitAl Improvements, not CapitOl improvements. Two positions, $281K???
#55—Seven janitors cost us $863k!!! That’s $123k per janitor!! And you guys wonder why we have a budget deficit????
#47—eliminate the entire Office of Cultural Affairs. If 2 positions eliminated saves $237k, eliminate all 16 positions saves $1,896,000.
#51 needs other choices that 20% or nothing.
#56—3 facilities managers earn $537k? $179k each!!
#59—3.5 positions for $504K, or $144k each. Shiop it to Bagalore. If the public has to endure offshore tech support, so should you.
#70—2 positions, $430k
One need only look to what you pay your people to understand why we are in such a budget mess. $123k for a janitor!!!! Most law school graduates don’t earn that much. Doctors @ Kaiser don’t earn an awful lot more than that. Teachers don’t earn that.
Unfortunately, the results from this survey might be interesting but they will be mostly worthless. The questions are loaded to produce a specific result so it’s hardly a valid sampling of opinion. Also, the lack of information about the impacts of suggested cuts forces people to make an uneducated selection.
I imagine you have already written up your comments about the survey results and how they back-up your opinion. Too bad, this could have been a useful tool, but instead it’s pretty much an exercise of wasting time.
City taxes are high enough. If you have to cut government to balance the budget, fine. But the last thing citizens need right now is more taxation.
Thank you for creating this opportunity via a public survey Pierluigi. The survey is useful because it allows people who may not otherwise participate to do just that.
I hope SJI folks will not only complete the survey; I hope they also forward the link on to their respective neighborhood contacts with a request that they too complete it.
Tina
Unfortunately, on the Tobacco Settlement money there was no option that said;
“Tell the Feds they can shove their $10M. We don’t want their dirty money.”
I filled out this survey and I applaud Pierluigi for putting it together. However, I wonder if by doing so we’re not just reinforcing the backassward way that our City operates.
The way this budget SHOULD be solved is not by having City Council making decisions that should be made by the department heads that we pay to make these decisions.
City Council should give the Police Department a budget to work within. The police chief, who presumably is the one with the expertise, should be the one deciding how best to allocate the money so as to provide the best possible police force for X number of dollars. Same goes for Fire, Library, Parks, etc. To be asking the general public if we think the horseback police should stay or not is crazy.
Also, on whether to cut funding to non-profits by the same 20% as libraries & parks.
Why limit it to 20%
What is Rhonda Berry’s salary at Our City Forest? Why do we fund her non-profit to plant street trees while eliminating the City’s program to trim them?
JMOC #5 made some of the points that jumped out at me too. $123K/yr. for janitors?
#5, JMO, I agree with you on the general level of city employee compensation. I suspect that the numbers he quotes include benefits, which makes the comparisons less stark, but informative nevertheless.
#6, OLI, such a jaded outlook. I’m surprised you wasted the time to post such speculative and inane stuff.
Pierluigi,
The survey is very good however you could have hit even harder on the elephants in the room.
Thanks for providing us with the ability to offer our input. By my count, it would not be so terribly difficult to eliminate the budget deficit. There is ample waste ripe for the cutting.
To my disappointment, our Mayor and most of the Council Members simply cannot get beyond the status quo.
Believe it or not, on the one item I’d be willing to accept a tax increase to pay for, I selected sewers.
I live in an area that is designated by FEMA as a Flood Hazard Zone. It is due to the potential for “sheet flooding”. In other words, the existing storm sewers do not have the capacity to drain the water away quickly enough in the event of a “100 year flood”. This is unacceptable. If the City can upgrade the storm sewer system to alleviate this risk then that is what should be done. This is the exact sort of function that Governments are meant to do and it is the sort of thing that should ALWAYS have priority over Cultural Affairs, affordable housing, etc.
What is this, New Orleans?
10 – “Jaded outlook?” Is reality that foreign to you? Questioning the validity of the survey is “speculative and inane?” Interesting, but seemingly clueless, interpretation.
Greg #12- I completely agree.
Any objective individual who has never been involved in politics could balance this budget in 15 minutes. This is why the situation is so frustrating…and dire.
Hello Pier,
I just completed the survey and donned the role of the Wicked Witch of West SJ. Pretty much everything that wasn’t Police or Fire related was whacked. With this huge deficit- parks, libraries, community centers-are the sacrificial lambs. My mom is p-off her Alma Senior Center is closing. The thing that bothers me the most is that my 85 yr old mom who paid taxes for 60+ yrs has to see “her City” reduced to the bare essentials and I feel kind of sad. I believe a city shouldn’t just be about Police and Fire. What about the quality of life?
One important aspect that I feel hasn’t been addressed is what the budget deficit is doing to us- psychologically. The quality of life in SJ is going to suffer tremendously from all these service cuts and how are we expected to cope? If you live in nice neighborhood -Rose Garden, Willow Glen, Naglee Park- maybe you won’t notice any change, but SJ is going to become Mumbai if there is no code enforcement, no graffiti abatement, no recreation centers, no libraries, no parks. Who’s going to pick up the slack? Or is Slumdog Silicon Valley the new reality? Or maybe it’s just time for me to move?
Outside Looking In,
Well said. People never think to question the survey’s construction or aim, but for some reason believe the results are impartial or unbiased, and reflect the issue well. Duh~
LadyGallica in W San Jose,
Move over on your broom, I’m with you! Anything but Public Safety can go!
Outside Looking In,
I believe Outside Looking In is correct. I’m not sure if this is what he/she had in mind but but I think the desired result is for the people to predictably cry, “don’t cut public safety”. They will then have tacit permission to raise taxes. You could have one police officer assigned to protect each and every person in San Jose and you’d still have people reflexively saying, “don’t cut public safety”.
With police & fire’s “favorite son” status among both conservatives and liberals alike for so many years, it’s impossible to believe that the waste and bureaucracy haven’t grown to enormous proportions in both departments.
Tell the police chief and the fire chief that their Department budgets must be cut by 12% and that we still expect first rate service. Let these highly paid experts decide where they can afford to cut back. It’s their job- not ours.
JW (#21),
Holy Crap Batman! You’ve just been identified as the antithesis of politically correct… and a racist too. We’ll need to sign you up for a couple of weekends of sensitivity training.
Should employees be allowed to accumulate sick pay?
Absolutely not. I used to suspect City employees of being somewhat lazy and of possessing a certain eagerness to take advantage of their employer. But I’ve since been enlightened by other SJI bloggers who have set me straight and informed me that City employees are honorable and dedicated to their work. That being the case, we needn’t have any concern that they would ever call in sick when they aren’t really sick just so they don’t waste their sick pay.
So since they don’t need this extra incentive to come to work each day, we can dispense with this archaic practice that assumes our workers aren’t the saints and angels that we now know them to be.
City government, just like private business and households, needs to do more with less. In this economy, many private businesspeople are working twice as hard just to stay afloat. Since we need to reduce the number of city employees due to budget constraints, the remaining public servants need to increse their efficiency and perhaps even “burn some midnight oil” as is necessary in the “real world” of private enterprise.
I agree that many of the questions were posed in such a way that it was virtually impossible to give a complete (or fully informed) answer. I searched the web for explanations of some of the terms and job positions mentioned in the questionaire and often came up with little helpful informaiton. However, I find it hard to believe that there is not an enormous amount of redundancy in city staffing and little incentive for efficiency.
Nonethelss, I am happy to have had the opportunity to “play” councilmember. Now if I could only be elected Queen…hmmm….
One comment I forgot to make in my last post…I wonder if anyone has seriously explored the cost of illegal aliens as it pertains to our city budget. It’s estimated that in 2004, the CA state government spent approx. $9 billion for the education, medical care and incarneration of illegal immigrants (you can only imagine what thtat amount was in 2008!). I wonder what portion of our municipal budget crisis could be eliminated if we refused to pay for this additional burden. Just a thought…
#23-Greg Howe,
JW may not know you are kidding.
One thing on this topic, the cost to taxpayers for the incarceration of illegal immigrants in California, that is. According to our Governor, we would save 200 MILLION dollars a year if we took illegals out of our prisons and deported them. All 19,000 of them! YIKES! Now that would be an incredible saving.
Wow, we could save $200 million! Maybe. Even if your figures are accurate, and that’s doubtful given the massive amounts of misinformation on this topic, $200 million is hardly a drop in the bucket of debt we are in. Perhaps those of you who think all of these “benefits” that illegals supposedly receive will cure the state’s budget woes should take another look at where to place blame.
#25-Just Wondering, you have an excellent point. I think the cost savings is higher than that reported in the press. Having said that, 200 million dollars feeds a lot of seniors, and disabled folks who just had their Social Security checks cut. It pays for a lot of dental care that low-income people won’t get after July 1st. It pays for a lot of things we should be paying for instead of illegal immigrant criminals in prison.
J Wilcox #21
Thanks for bringing up the elephant in the room. I think it is a fair question to ask how much the city estimates it spends on city services for illegal aliens. I am sure it is in the millions, maybe even as much as our deficit is this year. Yes, I know it is politically incorrect to bring up this subject but it is our money sent to the city and is in turn spent on illegal aliens. It is in fact part of the budget which is hidden in the police, fire, medical, and education budgets and dilutes city services for everyone. The city workers are easy targets because they are making a decent living in a bad economic situation and there are hard numbers.
Pier, what are the estimates of how much the city spends each year providing services to illegal aliens, and are you open to cutting these services and if not, why?
If we can’t blame the state deficit on illegals, then lets try to pin the city budget problem on them. I doubt there will be an answer to how much the city spends on illegals because they probably don’t divide up the money based on immigration status. Anyone who drives a car causes wear on the roads but I don’t think you will find a percentage of legal vs. illegal road wear or library usage or anything else.
It is not a matter of politically correct or not (a term that is way overused) but more a matter of taking care of each other. As someone said, “we may have come here on different ships, but we are all in the same boat now.”
Just Wondering (#28),
What a wonderfully squishy explanation you present. I suggest that you post your home address on this site so that we might divert ten illegal aliens to you for room and board. Would the 1st of June work for you? Or is putting your money where your mouth is beyond your capability?
The survey requires me to make cuts on the first 16 items before it shows me the next 20. Please post the entire list somewhere so I can see what are all the available cuts before doing the survey.
(Although this would require customizing Survey Monkey, it would also have been nice to show a running total of how much I’ve cut and how much more I have to cut to make $84M.)
OK Just Wondering. We can collectively stick our heads in the sand and pretend illegal aliens aren’t a big reason the state is broke. The problem will never be fixed unless we are willing to look at the entire picture and what got us here in the first place.
#27-Steve,
Good question.
Just Wondering,
I don’t think people are blaming illegals for the state we’re in. I think they are just looking at costs that need to be eliminated so that legal, taxpaying citizens don’t have to suffer any more financial hardship than necessary. I think you need to understand that these people have a right to be angry that their tax dollars are being spent on programs that enable, and encourage illegal immigrants to continue crossing our borders illegally.
We pay taxes to fund everything but that. Since our leaders are putting our tax dollars into the pockets of people who were not born and raised here, or who have NOT followed the law and immigrated here legally, then they are betraying those of us who follow the laws, and the rules. Either way you cut it that is just not acceptable to many of us.
Keep in mind too that the US already gives billions of dollars to other countries in foreign aid. We tax payer’s foot the bill for that too, but no one minds doing it because as you so aptly put it, we need to have compassion and help one another.
29 – Great response. Your comment indicates you believe we are paying for room and board for illegals. Any facts to back that up?
30 – We should look at the entire picture and not just the small impact illegals may be having. That should be part of the picture but the entire one as some folks on this blog seem to want.
31 – I believe some folks on this blog are blaming illegals for all the ills we have in this state. That is nothing new. One group is always looking for another group on which to place blame. It’s been going on forever and I’m sure it will continue, given the examples provided by a number of folks here.
The problem is that most of the illegal bashing that takes place is not based on fact. I look forward to hearing from anyone on this blog who can substantiate their opinion with fact. I realize that any person in this state or country, legal or not, has some cost impact on services, but I have yet to see any factual numbers to back-up the attacks I have read here. If the numbers are there, I will await the opportunity to see them.
Yeah, # 10, it probably includes benefits—but it’s still $123k for a janitor. Do ya think any private sector company pays its janitors that much, including benefits?
Half the problem pregnancies from Panama to the USA end up in border state hospitals. Kids of illegal aliens get breakfast and lunch on California taxpayers. Illegals accused of crimes get public defenders and translators on our dime. When convicted, they are not deported , but get room and board in CA prisons that we pay for. MediCal pays for the health care for illegals, which hard working class families make too much to qualify for.
Are illegals the cause of all our woes? Of course not. But when my 88 year old mother who worked for decades and pays taxes can’t get half the things illegals get, there is something seriously wrong.
The city of san jose gives $2 million every year for childrens healthcare. 90% of the children getting these benefits are undocumented.
Keep the libraries open instead of paying for illegal immigrants.
#35 J Wilcox. Very well said. In the 2010 Federal election we must vote against all politicions who don’t make a very firm promise to deport all illegals without execeptions. America cannot survive on the present course. Tuesdays election in California was a good start.
Rather than deporting illegal aliens, how about deporting the legislature? Their lack of any kind of fiscal responsibility has landed us where we are today. California experienced significant revenue growth until last year, yet the state managed to grow spending faster.
Our state constitution has become an untenable combination of spending requirements and tax inhibitors. It’s time for a do over…
33 – That’s an amazing figure, if true. What is your source for the 90% number? If it is true, you feel that children of undocumented parents would be better off uninsured? If only it were that simple and there were no consequences. Anyway, I’d be interested in knowing where you got the 90% from.
36 – Boy, you sure read a lot into things that aren’t there. Apparently, because I dare ask for something resembling a factual statement, I am therefore the cause of the problems we face.
I never said there aren’t costs involved with illegals, but I did question the wild numbers being thrown around here. And, then when you can’t back it up, it’s my fault. Wonderful rebuttal.
37 – The above applies to you as well. I usually like to know what I am talking about before I say something in public. You, on the hand, would rather attack someone for questioning your lack of substantive information and blame them because you might not have a solid argument. Nice.
All I am doing is asking folks to share even a shred of fact with us regarding some of the unsubstantiated statements that are made here. You can call it “but why, mommy” rhetoric, but I call it due diligence.
There is a pattern on this blog by those who think they know-it-all to attack those of us who dare question you. It was cute in the beginning but now it’s just pathetic.
34 – In my opinion, ALL people who are in the USA illegally (children and adults)should be returned to their country of origin. Clearly, we as a society are unable to provide basic services to American citizens, most of whom have been paying into the system for decades. We can not afford to meet the needs/expectations of people who are here illegally. They will only stop coming to the US when we stop providing them with ANY kind of public assistance and make it a serious crime for US citizens to employ them.
Millions of illegal Mexican immigrants were rounded up and deported by the US in the 1930s and again in the early 1950s. Surely with all the advanced technology available today, the federal governemnt is quite capable of locating and deporting those who are here illegally. The governemnt does not lack the ability, just the will.
So now that I’ve really stirred up a hornet’s nest…
Just Wondering,
“If the numbers are there, I will await the opportunity to see them”
The politicians whose policies you support have made it impossible to collect these statistics, so we must rely on the evidence that is before our very eyes each day. Of course, all you are likely to see each day is the dark sand in which your head is buried.
*The State is barred from publishing crime statistics that are broken down by citizen vs. illegal alien.
*Our own police are not allowed to question the immigration status of arrestees.
These are policies that have been promoted by people with your attitude.
You make it impossible to gather statistics. Then, you complain that we don’t give you those statistics that you won’t allow us to gather!
But statistics are just numbers anyway. You want to ignore your own human judgement and common sense and base every decision in your life on data, studies, and statistics? I don’t. American citizens aren’t numbers. Try running a business in which you have to compete with cheap, illegal immigrant labor every day, Just Wondering. Then come tell me that their impact on the economy is insignificant.
In the meantime, keep enjoying the fruits of this plantation economy you’re so eager to perpetuate.
Just Wondering,
Even if it were only $100 per year per illegal, that would be $100 too much. For God’s sake man, do you have any understanding whatsoever regarding the value of money and the fairness of taking care of one’s own first? Apparently not.
I waste my breath even replying to your ridiculous “but why mommy” remarks. Please let us know when you can move ten illegals into your home and feed them. You never did answer me – will June 1st work for you?
41 Just Wondering,
Here is just one of many studies that estimates California’s cost of government services to illegal aliens to be about $10 billion each year – and that was as of 2004.
#41
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/immigrationnaturalizatio/a/caillegals.htm
Hey guys, come on. We all need to try and keep this discussion respectful and civil. Let’s not beat up on one another. It is counter productive. I too would like to see some links to sites on these figures. (By the way John Galt is absolutely correct, our politicians have made gathering reliable stats on this, and many other issues very difficult, and virtually impossible!) If you have some links, please provide them. Blogs are here not only to voice our opinions, but also to educate one another.
And finally, let’s not forget one major fact here; our government has turned a blind eye and a deaf ear to illegals crossing the borders for at least a decade now. Profits outweighed our immigration laws, public safety, and politicians not only allowed this, but supported corporations to hire illegals at a cheap rate of pay, while rewarding them with huge tax breaks for outsourcing our jobs.
Just Wondering is 100% correct about one thing, we are looking to blame someone, and illegals aren’t the only ones at fault here. I agree with Pat Waite on this one, let’s deport our Legislators!
#41- Just Wondering,
I agree you have every right to ask for folks to share figures and facts with you. I have an article in the Merc below to show you where I got my figures on the incarceration of illegals in our prisons. It does not match the 200 million dollar amount quoted by the Governor on TV. The article amount does NOT include the cost we incur for incarceration of illegals in our local jails though.
“California will face ‘devastating’ cuts, Schwarzenegger says.”
http://www.mercurynews.com/topstories/ci_12411674
43, 45 – Thanks.
42 – See, it’s not so difficult. You might want to try factual statements instead of your snotty, little comments. Your argument would go much further than it does now.
Okay all,
You have until June 5th, to let the Mayor and Council know you don’t want cuts to our Police Department, or public safety programs like Crime Prevention. If you don’t write, call, and let your voice be heard, then do not complain when it is too late! (Please keep in mind; since the State measures failed to pass, our Police, Fire, and Crime Prevention units will all be facing serious cuts!)
Mayor Chuck Reed 408-535-4800
[email protected]
Pierluigi OliverioDistrict 408-535-4906
[email protected]
Pete ConstantDistrict 408-535-4901
[email protected]
Madison NguyenDistrict 408-535-4907
[email protected]
Ash KalraDistrict 408-535-4902
[email protected]
Rose HerreraDistrict 408-535-4908
[email protected]
Sam LiccardoDistrict 408-535-4903
[email protected]
Judy ChircoDistrict 408-535-4909
[email protected]
Kansen ChuDistrict 408-535-4904
[email protected]
Nancy PyleDistrict 408-535-4910
[email protected]
Nora CamposDistrict 408-535-4905
[email protected]
Just Wondering, you’re hopeless! I suspect you must be at least half-ostrich. I’ll waste no more time rebutting your “but why, mommy” rhetoric.
Just Wondering,
With all due respect, you’re fighting dirty.
You employ the intellectual equivalents of hairpulling and biting if this were a physical altercation.
You argue that the assertion that a large population of illegal aliens is harmful to our society should be dismissed unless it is backed up by facts and figures.
Let met turn your own argument around on you.
You evidently believe that the large presence of illegal aliens is NOT significantly harmful to our society. OK, Just Wondering. That’s a pretty bold statement- a pretty wild claim in my estimation. Where are YOUR facts and figures to support YOUR position? Hmm? You prove to me that illegal aliens are not responsible for most of our problems.
You see, Just Wondering, this argument isn’t like a criminal trial. It’s not up to me, the prosecution, to prove my case beyond a reasonable doubt. Instead, it’s an even debate, more like a civil trial, in which YOU are under just as much obligation to prove your case as I am.
So you go ahead and gather your evidence. You show us just how much non-Enlish speaking students DON’T cost our classrooms. You show me exactly how much illegal aliens DON’T cost us in hospital emergency rooms. And while you’re at it, prove to me with your facts and figures, just why I shouldn’t be angry about seeing my IRS Form 1040 line 37 be significantly smaller than it might have been were it not for the presence of millions of illegal aliens who are happy to work for peanuts.
As a matter of fact, Just Wondering, I’d say the burden of proof lies more squarely on your shoulders than on mine because you have the added hurdle of showing that YOUR facts and figures are so conclusive that they justify the breaking of our own laws.
48 – I did not say “the large presence of illegal aliens is NOT significantly harmful to our society.” In fact, I acknowledged that there is no doubt an impact of some proportion. My main argument was that some folks have thrown around some pretty wild numbers and accusations. I don’t see anything wrong with accountability but some of you obviously do. If people want to continue spouting opinion as truth, fine. Go for it.
It is about time!
U.S. to check immigration status of people in local jails
“Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano “has made that very clear” that her top priority is deporting illegal immigrants who have committed crimes, said David Venturella, program director at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.”
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_12398322
The custodial reduction includes a reduction in full-time positions AS WELL as custodial contractual funding. Custodians DO NOT make $123,000, or cost $123,000. If you’re that concerned about how much a custodian costs, then read the darn budget book.
I am disappointed Pier did not see fit to answer my question from post #27 which was
“Pier what are the estimates of how much the city spends each year providing services to illegal aliens, and are you open to cutting these services and if not, why?” Although a not politically correct question I think it is a fair question in this current crisis. I have a feeling there is no answer to this question as it is so politically incorrect nobody at the city dares go out on this limb and keep track of this including the city council and mayor. To do so would be the end of their politcal career.
The City of San Jose is doing everything it can to demonize it’s city employees labor groups. There’s no such salary for a custodian of 123K including benefits. Try about 75K. It behooves the ones that assume that a class of people who are custodians sould make alot less and not have a liveable wage simply because they are underclass and probably illegal according to some posters on this blog.
Pierluigi Oliverio, if he even reads the posts to his survey should at least have the cajones to set straight the salaries of the people that he wants to cut and contract out.
But what would you expect from a politician looking for some noteriety on the backs of labor.
Long week….
#27
The city does not track the cost of services to illegal immigrants. The city provides services to the public as both documented and undocumented people use parks, libraries and public safety.
As many of the bloggers wrote this week there is a cost to many different levels of government however the city does not track it.
#34 asked about comments by #33.
#33 Made a comment about $2 million of San Jose’s tobacco settlement monies or HNVF money that is spent every year on health care for children. The number is correct that 85-90% of those $2 million are spent on children that are undocumented instead of core city services listed in the city charter Section 807.
#55-Pierluigi,
Thank you for providing what you can. I think it is important for the City to “start” tracking it. I think people would really be surprised at how much money is going into services for illegals. I think you’d personally be surprised at how many tax-paying citizens are going without the same services illegals receive. All you have to do is look at medical, food stamps, education, grants, and etc. to get an idea of how screwed up our system really is.
If the City really does want to cut costs and provide core services, they are going to have to stop fearing back lash from pro illegal immigrant groups, bite the bullet, and stop enabling the expenditure of our tax dollars from going into programs that not only enable illegals to stay here, but encourages illegal immigration.
These pro illegal immigrant groups can fund raise and provide for these folks themselves. They can start by suing all the huge, wealthy cooperation’s that hire them, and exploit them. I’d even contribute to a legal fund to help them do it!
55 – The children are undocumented? If they were born here aren’t they citizens? Their parents might be undocumented but I didn’t think the children were. And if you don’t track the cost of services to illegals how do you come up with this figure? Could you or someone clarify? Thanks.
Pier #55,
You have to be kidding that “The city does not track the cost of services to illegal immigrants” as you state. We all know that is a HUGE amount of where are city budget goes, and we have no way of tracking it? Hysterical….no wonder we and the state are broke.
Just because people read books in languages other than English does not mean they are illegal.
#57-The term undocumented means illegal. The PC Police changed the term, “illegal aliens” into the politically correct, and watered down term “undocumented immigrants.” Many illegals bring their children to this country illegally. They don’t stop and think about the harm they are causing them when they do. They don’t think about the fact that their children will grow into adults one day, and have to hide, and lie like they do. It just makes me sick to think about the pain these children go through because their parents chose to break the law, instead of applying to come here legally.
What angers me most about all this is they break the law coming here, have children in the US knowing full well what the consequences are if they get caught, and are deported. In the rare, and I mean rare instance that an illegal who gave birth to children in the US gets caught and deported, they scream and cry that we are taking their children a way from them, and splitting up their families. It is just unbelievable to me when I see this kind of irresponsible behavior on the part of illegals who do this to innocent children. It is also a direct middle finger to those immigrants who spent years, and thousands of dollars to get here legally.
#61-Reader said,” Just because people read books in languages other than English does not mean they are illegal.”
That is very true. My Mother immigrated here legally from Germany. While my Mother learned English, spoke it, and read it, she read books written in German until the day she died.
I think what #60 said has merit to it though. DMV, our voter’s manual, etc. come in several different languages, and we pay for it through our taxes. (You never see a STOP sign written in German, Spanish, Vietnamese, Iranian, Indian, etc. on roads in the US, but you see bilingual DMV booklets!)
I am torn on this issue myself. I do think having bilingual materials are very important, but I also feel it encourages folks not to learn the English language. It is a catch 22 you know what I mean?
#57
The numbers are provided by Santa Clara Family Health Foundation as they track it since I believe they are the ones who receive the $2 million from the city every year. They use the terminology “undocumented” so not sure if their definition matches #57 definition or Kathleen’s or Steve’s. Have a good weekend everyone-whether we agree or disagree.
San Jose libraries spend 600K a year on books in non english languages. Is that necessary? When does it end?
No-one can seriously deny that California has a significant illegal alien population. No-one can deny they nattend taxpayer-supported schools, get breakfast and lunch provided to them at taxpayer expense while in school, get taught in spanish, fill up the ER’s of every county hospital in the state, are eligible for MediCal, get free public defenders and translators when they are arrested for crimes.
There is a significant cost to the taxpayers for all that; and many of us are tired of paying for it, especially when taxpaying citizens cannot get the same benefits.
It’s also politically expediant to demonize undocumented workers and their families. City services doesn’t specifify race in regards to services rendered. Please read the city charter.
It’s also important to know those undocumented workers spends money for goods and services in the Santa Clara valley which so happens to enhance city budgets by sales tax.
It’s the state which get’s nailed regarding unfunded federal mandates for undocumented workers regarding education, medical etc.
If you want to point fingers for the SJ deficit find out who voted for expansion of the SJ airport and the Taj Mahal on Santa Clara st. There is where you’ll find the major source of accumation of City debt.
#64-Badcat,
Not true, they send more home than they spend here:
“Sending more home”
“The Inter-American Development Bank survey found that between 2004 and 2006, the percentage of immigrants sending money regularly increased from 61 to 73 percent.”
““Even as the federal government is starting to crack down on companies that hire illegal immigrants, it’s been helping those same workers send money home, cheap,” The Los Angeles Times writes today.”
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/02/even_as_the_fed.html
65 – Your own cite says “…the percentage of immigrants sending money regularly increased from 61 to 73 percent.” It doesn’t say they are sending home more than they spend here, merely more of them are sending money home. Where does it say they are sending home more than they spend here?
64—at the low end wages most illegals make, their spending hardly covers the cost of services that we taxpayers provide for them—MediCal/free medical treatment, no questions asked; school in their language, requiring bilingual teachers; free breakfast and lunch at school; They buy cars, but get no insurance, getting in accidents, which raises the insurance rates of their victims. Plus, so many work “off the books” that they provide little income tax revenue as a group; costs for public defenders, translators, the costs of incarceration.
Since they have little money after food and rent and what they send home, and there is no sales tax on food and rent, their contribution to the sales tax base is miniscule compared to their cost to taxpayers.
We need to get every illegal here who wants to work “on the books”. Start an immediate work permit program for everyone who wants to work. And those who don’t work, send them back to their country of origin.
BTW, I understand that the term has changed once again. It started as “illegal alien,” then was double-speaked and PC’d into “undocumented immigrant.” Now I hear that it’s been changed to “undocumented Democrat.”
#66-Read It Again,
My apologies, it seems the link I attached to the first item, “Sending more home”
“The Inter-American Development Bank survey found that between 2004 and 2006, the percentage of immigrants sending money regularly increased from 61 to 73 percent.” didn’t appear in my post.
I think you need to read the item more carefully. It says, the % of immigrants sending money regularly increased from 61% to 73%. It does not say SPENDING, it says SENDING.
You can do your own research and see for yourself. Any decreases in sending money home, is completely due to rising costs for necessities, AND loss of jobs.
Please provide us with stats showing us that illegals SPEND more here in the US on goods, not necessities like rent, food, etc. I’d love to see them.
#68_Greg,
You are on a slippery sloop here. The Repubs are the ones that refused to support Bush’s Immigration Reform. Remember?