Editor’s Note: Police union president George Beattie wrote an op-ed blaming city officials for police layoffs. City Manager Debra Figone responded by sending a memo to the mayor and city council detailing why layoffs occurred and San Jose passed on a federal police grant that would have saved jobs. Beattie has now provided San Jose Inside with a response to Figone’s memo.
By George Beattie
It’s nice to see that City Manager Debra Figone finally chose to write a memo explaining her almost unilateral decision to lay off 43 of the 66 officers that San Jose discarded last week. Unfortunately, this memo came 38 days after she grossly mishandled the opportunity to keep these officers on the job. Interestingly, the City Manager and her staff seem to be able to write memos on virtually everything when they want to, even—for example—on opinion pieces in the Mercury News. Apparently, though, articulating her reasoning behind her failure to apply for millions in grant money from the federal government wasn’t important enough to explain for 38 days. Had she allowed a little “sunshine” on her thought process before it was too late, I may have been able to help correct some of the mistakes in her reasoning.
On May 25, 2011, Figone, an unelected administrator, denied the people’s elected representatives on the City Council the chance to even consider accepting money from the federal government that could have funded 43 police officer positions. As evidence of her complete failure to communicate her intensions, Councilmember Pete Constant on that same day authored a budget memo and issued a press release regarding his proposal to preserve 53 police officer positions with funding from the COPS grant. What’s more on May 27th, even Mayor Reed indicated in an interview on KGO 810AM that San Jose could have afforded to fund 20 COPS grant positions—Figone applied for 10. This is shameful and outrageous!
But let’s address some of the specifics in Figone’s July 1st memo. Her assertion that applying for all 53 positions, “would have burdened the General Fund with an additional $16 million over the next four years,” is simply a mischaracterization of reality. Applying for the COPS grant, is not the same as accepting the funds if they were actually awarded. The reality behind the situation is that applying for all 53 positions would have cost the city absolutely nothing—zero dollars. This is because sending in an application isn’t the same as actually being awarded the funding, much as applying to—for example—Stanford University is not the same as actually being accepted. On May 25th, the city manager chose to simply not apply for the funds; a decision she has not explained, nor has anyone asked her to do so in a public setting. In my opinion, this too is shameful.
A blog post on San Jose Inside this week suggested Figone might have, “felt some councilmembers couldn’t be trusted to walk away from money.” If this hypothesis into the city manager’s thinking is correct, one has to wonder why we have a City Council at all? San Jose taxpayers after all pay more than $8 million annually to fund the City Council. Despite that investment of scarce tax revenue, the city manager appears able to decide by fiat which decisions are simply too important to be trusted to individuals as untrustworthy as the people’s elected representatives.
On Figone’s specific assertion that San Jose could not afford the $16 million that the city would be responsible to pay if we accepted the funding for 43 positions, what she doesn’t tell you is that San Jose’s cost for 2011/2012 would have been just $1.3 million, 2012/2013 would have been just $1.5 million and 2014/2015 would have been just $1.7 million. The vast majority of the City’s responsibility—$11.5 million—wouldn’t have come due until fiscal year 2015/2016. Even if we assume the far-fetched possibility that the economy won’t improve by 2016, or that some type of pension reform wouldn’t be put in place before then, I can think of at least one way the city could have covered the cost. We know with certainty that more than 100 of our most senior, and thus, most expensive officers will retire over the next 4 years, myself included. The savings from these retirements alone would have more than covered the city’s COPS grant responsibilities.
The decision to lay off 43 police officers is one that should have been made by the city council and even then shows a City that has its priorities mixed up. We have a war and gang violence in our streets and now we are taking out the only people who can stop and catch the criminals! Preserving public safety by saving every officer job possible goes hand-in-hand with the first duty of government: to protect the citizens. And while the city council did ultimately make the choice to lay off 66 officers last month, they did so denied one very real possibility to keep 43 of them on the street.
Everyone in the City Manager’s Office should be ashamed by this. This is a travesty. Our City is experiencing its worst homicide rate in years, the Manager’s Office has spent it’s time casting blame on the PD and Fire Departments for our budget problems – all while sitting on this?
Residents of San Jose: you just lost 66 college-educated cops that were the cream of the crop. You sat back while the Mercury News and a handful of self-appointed “community leaders” bashed your squeaky-clean big-city police department over a bunch of trumped-up nothing. You lost your police chief when you failed to back him when he had the guts to stand up to an arrogant city manager, a bully of a mayor and a lynch-mob of cop-haters. Why do you think Reed and Figone have demonized their employees? Because they don’t want you pointing the finger at them. They’re not going to be the victim of a crime. But hey, at least your community center hours only got cut by 4 a week! That’s what the people want, according to the mayor.
Wake up yourself, Rip Van Winkel!
For two decades the people slept through a series of irresponsible mayors, city councils, and city managers who the public employees, including the cops, were only too happy to have in place as they recklessly spent money on them and everything else.
Figone and Reed just happen to be the leftist incompetents in place when the money finally ran out. So now it’s time for the inevitable union temper tantrum.
No, it’s about protecting the public and those who risk their lives to do so. Your many comments on numerous postings remind me of a great quote by President Theodore Roosevelt: “The function of the mere critic is of very subordinate usefulness. It is the doer of deeds who actually counts in the battle for life, and not the man who looks on and says how the fight ought to be fought, without himself sharing the stress and the danger.” (1894) I’ve fought the fight, I’ve bled and I’ve seen my co-workers die horrific deaths protecting this city. What have you done?
Thank you.
What have I done?
I’ve worked my entire career never demanding a damned thing from you. I put my own money aside for my own retirement. I pay ALL of the Social Security tax while YOU complain about having to pay even a small percentage of your as I pick up the tab for the rest. I buy my own health insurance- 100%. I ask you to contribute nothing. When I’m injured at my job which is statistically far more dangerous than yours, I ask you to pay exactly nothing during my recovery. I’m the guy who has faithfully paid my property tax, contractor’s license, and has maintained a City business license supporting a City and police department that doesn’t lift a finger to prevent illegal aliens from living here and competing with me and driving down my earnings. I’m the breadwinner who you count upon to stick it out here and not flee to another area like so many others, leaving behind a city full of takers like yourself but nobody left to take from. When you wonder why you’re so lucky to be retired in your 50s, I’ll be the guy still working into his 70s whom you can thank.
You start learning to be responsible for your own life. THEN you can come swaggering in here playing the Hero Card and quoting TR.
Whether you people working for the government realize it or not, you derive your comfortable living by being cogs in what has become a gigantic, clumsy, corrupt sytem that exists more to serve itself than to fulfill the purposes for which it was created. You just haven’t noticed because you’re too busy telling each other how terrific you are.
John Galt’s post needs to be etched in stone in big letters and hung above the main entrance to city hall.
“I’m the guy who has faithfully paid my property tax, contractor’s license, and has maintained a City business license supporting a City and police department that doesn’t lift a finger to prevent illegal aliens from living here and competing with me and driving down my earnings.”
———————————————-
John
I have been following your post with interest as you seem to be on a mission. In an attempt to find credibility of your position I endeavored to validate your claims. Unfortunately I was unable to locate a John Galt in data bases of California consumer affairs contractors’ state license board or City of San Jose tax directory. Are you hiding behind an alias? At this point I’ll deem your post typical of a anti police/ union shill.
I have consistently wondered what your problem was with the government employee and the reason you seem to detest them so. Now I realize that my suspicions were correct. You are jealous. Your whole whining statement shows a lot and tells the story. It is no one’s fault but your own that you chose the career that you did. That is what you wanted, evidently; to be your own boss. To work for yourself. You got what you wanted and you can see the hard work that comes with being your own boss. It would have been the very same for any one of us who chose that route…but we didn’t. I suspect that at one time you may have applied for a city contract…and did not get it and your loathing is so out front that it makes you stink. It’s not our fault that you have to work into your 70’s. These choices were all yours. Live with them and get over it. And by the way, for umteen years I paid ALL of MY social security tax and a portion of that money helps to pay YOUR pension. You live in America, you play by America’s rules. One pays into SS and it goes to take care of our elders; you or whomever. You make it sound as if you and ONLY you is “picking up the tab” for the public employee’s salary and pension. YOU are the one who is swaggering and playing the “I am the wonderful one picking up the tab for the employee” hero card. Your whole post sounds like you are whining about what you have to do because of the career YOU chose. Sounds like you have so many grudges…against the public employee, against the “illegal aliens” who are “competing with me and driving down my earnings.” Lot of hatred showing. I will give you this, though…I applaud you for your hard work and being able to be your own boss and make a living for yourself. It takes a lot of tenacity of purpose and it is truly hard work. On the other hand, your green with envy self smells really foul and that makes for an ugly soul…inside and out.
You both sound like the same person. I’ll bet you are.
@Novice.
Cry me river!!!! I’ve been a cop for 16 years. I go out into the city of San Jose everyday and ready myself to commit to violence at a moments notice to protect the citizens of the city. That’s what I do my friend.
I pay my property taxes, I pay $2000.00 dollars a month into my retirement, I pay for my healthcare plan, so what’s your point?
We are all in the same game, so stop whining.
Be careful of talking about your heroics. The last 10 years has produced many many sons and daughters of San Jose whom have seen more in 6 months than you will see in your career. Better to keep your chest thumping and quotes to yourself. We respect your service. I have found those with the loudest voice had the least of credentials. Again thanks for you service.
For taking the bait and exposing yourself for who you truly are…
John Galt is a character in Ayn Rand’s 1957 novel, “Atlas Shrugged.” Galt is an inventor and philosopher who rails against an oppressive, bureaucratic and increasingly socialistic regime by convincing “wealth producers” to quit producing in order to starve the government of revenue. He is the fictional hero of the Tea Party movement. Explain a few things?
Same game? It was a game alright.
Public employee unions have spent the last 15 years winning big at the city hall baccarat tables whilst union owned city politicians provided free drinks and a fixed game – all on the taxpayer dime.
The casino is now bankrupt and the gorged public employees have the audacity to whine and fingerpoint and expect sympathy and continuation of their gold plated cadillac compensation all on the backs of struggling-to-make-ends-meet taxpayers.
Bring on the ballot measures.
Bring on Wisconsin.
Ahhh the truth about “John Galt!” He doesn’t like the police or the City Gov’t because they don’t, ” lift a finger to prevent illegal aliens from living here and competing with…. and driving down his earnings…”
Hey John, go take a civic class somewhere and learn about the Constitution and Federalism. What exactly would you like the SJPD and Mayor to do? Start deportation proceedings? You have no clue!
That many of the sons and daughters of San Jose also wear SJPD blue in betweeen multiple deployments overseas. At the height of the war almost 40 officers were deployed at one time. Sadly, after their service to city and country, some were laid off at the end of June. They have given quite a bit.
I think you and John Galt are one and the same person.
Read “Atlas Shrugged” by Ayn Rand. I’m guessing it’s a pen name, but chosen for its deeper meaning. There’s pros and cons on anonymous postings, but I’ll take a thoughtful contribution from a regular person using a pen name over internet troll flames.
As far as being background checked by folks, political operatives and others have always done opposition research to find all the dirt on not only current but potential opponents. Check with your buddies and I bet they’ll help you track down this person’s real name and home address, criminal history, credit check, marriages/divorces..etc. Might not be legal or right, but its done all the time in SJ politics.
30 years of law enforcement can be just as debilitating on the body and mind as six months of deployment in the sand box. SJPD has many members who have done both and know of what they speak.
No chest thumping here, however, you have no idea! Stay safe.
john mayor reed has lost more money then you’ll 25million cart races 24million research oakland a’s
reed an co appoved 80-90 million construction new headworks at wp reed an co never came out to the project it satfor 3yrs ran out of warrenty still not
working city manager 275 k yr 5 asst at 200k blame the unions this proves how evil this group is reed should step down he’s city managers boss reed an co must go cant be trust
As a homeowner not living in San Jose’s affluent neighborhoods, nor a member of San Jose’s privileged politically socially connected class. I am concerned with safety of my family and property, my children are terrified with the increased murders, stabbings, drive by shootings and recent road rage attempted murder 5 days ago. Like many others I feel the City Council made a terrible decision by laying off officers and delivered council member Constant an embarrassing career ending slap in the face. Reed needs to cease this nonsense and do the right thing.
The city manager has no business getting involved in disciplinary actions with the police department, that’s why we have a police chief, a chain of command, we are a para-military organization. Officer’s have no respect for her.
She’s thrown away over 10 million dollars in training police officer’s. 30 got hired by others police departments (free police officers) and 66 got laid off. WHAT A WASTE!!!!!
She’s writing secret memo’s to the council, complaining about employees of the police department, because they stood up to her. Figone, guess what? Like the old saying goes, ” you couldn’t carry their jock straps.” SHAME!!!
She needs to be DISMISSED!!!!
Any Union worth it’s Salt would have a larger political association as a umbrella protection. My question for the Union would be. You knew up to 100 members were going to lose jobs. You knew about the cops grants. Why did you allow this to happen? I know for sure if I was in your position I would have been at work attempting to secure and inform the public of your status in attempting to secure these officers jobs. You waited and in my humble opinion allowed these officers to leave with out a fight. I think you gambled with a PR bonanza at the expense of getting rid of the City Manager. As an organization to save officers jobs you were not on the job. Blame all not just one
If Beattie is going take on the roll of “truth teller” and act as if he is above political games he should tell truth – the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Beattie (i.e. the POA) knew that the city was looking at a federal grant for 53 police officer positions and of the city managers decision not to apply for 43 of them long before he made it public on 5/26/11 (and well before the deadline to apply was all but passed). Why did he wait until it as too late to turn around the city managers decision to inform us? Political expediency? Advice from his L.A. based political consultant? Was he willing to sacrifice those officer positions for his own (perceived) political gain i.e. the knight in shinning armor who exposed the city managers agenda?
Beattie has a history of “barking after the thief is gone” i.e. the elimination of the VCET Unit (SJPD’s dedicated uniformed “street gang” unit). He (the POA) put out a press release and took out a full page add in the Merc News lambasting the city for cutting the unit (September/2010) and he has been bemoaning the elimination of VCET ever since (i.e. the current high rate of violent gang activity/crimes). There is no doubt that the cutting of the VCET Unit was dump move – taking away SJPD’s only proactive gang enforcement unit has allowed gangs to feel empowered to “act out”. But let’s set the record straight as to the process that led to VCET’s elimination. The POA, who Beattie is president of, signed off on the downsizing of the Special Operations division which VCET was part of. The cutting of VCET was a decision by the command staff of the police department, with POA input. Beattie would like you to believe that the city managers’ office made the decision unilaterally…not true. If the Chief of Police wanted to retain VCET he could have cut elsewhere – within Sp Ops or another area of the police department. Beattie not only knew about the decision to cut VCET (before it was done), he had input into that decision…but he didn’t say a word about the elimination; much less fight for retention of VCET until after the fact.
History has a way of repeating its self and past behavior is the best indictor of future behavior. Beattie acts like he has been left in the dark about a decision and then takes on the role of Paul Revere…but when his agenda is exposed, he looks more like the Little Boy who cried wolf once to often.
Sounds like a Bobby Lopez reply.
Who cares if it’s a Bobby Lopez reply or not? Isn’t the real issues whether or not the author of the post makes a valid point. I am so sick of the politics of personality that has pervaded so many of these comments. Shouldn’t we be focused on the issue rather than the personal attack?
C’mon, you know the rules…if you can’t refute the argument, belittle the arguer!
yeah, bobby give it up. I know you added dates in your post but that does not make the nonsense you write true. Get over yourself.
Dear ‘give it up’,
You clearly misapprehend my point which is this: the details of the post look about right to me. The narrative pretty well squares with my recollection of events. Whether it was written by Bobby Lopez or not, the real question is whether or not the comment has merit and is credible. And, in matters of policy or social critique, isn’t that the real point: to be credible, well documented and factual?
And, do you have specific information to refute the post? Or, are you simply going attempt to discredit the post by attacking the person whom you believe to be the author? This is what I mean about politics of personality: transforming the issue in question into a thinly veiled personal attack. The politics of this issue are ugly enough without injecting ad hominem attacks and other forms of fallacious reasoning into it.
If you have facts, present them. If you have a countervailing argument, support it with facts. If you disagree, then support it with facts. Discourse – even disagreement – are healthy for a republic, so, by all means, indulge in dissent if you will, but please, make it about the facts and not about personality.
I asked you in a past post if you worked for the Union. You should. These people who hate this guy they keep talking about have no other way to address the failures of their Union. Maybe with your help they might get some respect back with the community. You show a true professional response.
Good job cops! The City’s agenda is to divide and conquer. It looks like they divided the PD. Go air out your dirty laundry at a POA mtg. Not on a public blog. A few of you have succeeded in bashing your Assoc in the Merc, Vanguard, and SJI. Youre even trying to start a seperate Union. Strength is in unity not division. Remember it was BL who broke away from the Firefighters. Brilliant! Please stay professional and stop acting like Cops!
No worries the police administration that cut VCET has created AGATT and two federal immigration agents have been brought in…the citizens most effected (eastside/central san jose) can be sure the gang problem will now disappear…..those of you in almaden valley and willow glen your library (daycare) hours have been saved
If the city had applied for all 53 it would have showed the officers and the citizens that the city is doing everything it can to save jobs. The city was never on the hook for all the positions and at the end of the day they could have only taken 10. But, it would have showed they were interested in saving as many as they could. The city failed in that regard and further jeopardized the safety of its residents. The city will never recover the costs associated to recruiting, back ground investigations, academy training and deployment into the field training program. I have heard that these costs exceeded $8 million dollars for those 66 officers.
I’m a west San Jose resident and am angered by this decision! City Manager Debra Figone, you should be ashamed of your poor judgement regarding this matter. Can someone please respond with the total amount of “free” (federal) money the city would have received over the term of the COPS grant for the entire 53 positions. Thank you.
What is this…Beattie praising Councilmember Pete Constant efforts? How can this be? Beattie has refrained from using Constant’s given name for the last 3+ years, referring to him as “Judas” instead. I guess politics make strange bedfellows.
You know, I actually don’t fault George for this. I am no apologist for either him or Constant, but it does reinforce something I’ve said before – in matters such as these, no one can be absolutely right or absolutely wrong all the time. It’s important to address the issues individually and separately from the individual in question. At the same time, it’s important to make clear your support of the individuals position on a particular issue vs. support of the individual in general.
Dear City Manager
Thanks for getting those cops off the street, we get more money from those dummies who get lost and get out of their cars.
You and the bald white guy mayor deserve a cut from Nuestro Familia!!!
FIGONE SHOULD BE FIRED!!!!
How did the San Jose Fire Fighters end up getting a grant for their people?
It was long process, well over a year total, which required approval prior to applying for the grant, working with budget office to ensure the Fire budget would be able to meet the fund requirements, then receiveing the award and then working with the many requirements and the poltiical process to be able to accept it. It did not just happen but took quite a bit of tiem and coordiantion with several City departments and other agencies. The police department has been dealing with grants for several years longer than Fire and has or had a staff to work on grant applications. While Fire has utilized some UASI grants for various small equipment purchases, Fire does not have dedicated grant staff and has just over the last two to three years been working to secure SAFER and Fire Act federal grants for items like self contained breathing apparatus, a burn trailer and the recent staffing grant.
So, based on her actions, one might conclude that Debra Figone is an authoritarian mini-dictator, basically running some of the most important aspects of what she clearly perceives as her little feifdom. When it comes to important decisions like this one, the City Council is really just an afterthought for her. And, if she is so willing to decide by fiat in such an important matter as public safety, one must wonder how many other significant decisions she has made in this manner. Given City Hall’s flagrant lack of transparency and honesty with the public, we may never know.
Unfortunately, George Beattie is coming a bit late to the game in this. He has simply reiterated much of what other commentators and I have stated since the news of this travesty first broke. Sure, he publicized this issue weeks ago, but it feels very much like barring the gates AFTER the vandal hordes have looted the city.On this issue, as with many others, the POA President and VP have failed to be timely, compelling and informative. These are just a couple of the grievances that many of my fellow officers and I have with our POA and the executive board in particular.
At this point, Lt. Beattie, it feels like too little too late, even though some might say, “Better late than never.”
Stand by as the internal fireworks start, folks.
First, federal grants are not free and require the ability to match or pay, which the City could not do at this point. The application terms could not be met at present (showing the matching fund) and the grant application take months to process and get a response back. The recent accepatance of the fire grant for staffing took several months to accomplish so those that think this COPS grant is instantaneous it is not. The COPS grant can be filed for next cycle if the details can be worked out so I hope both sides will talk in person rather than in the press. The PD have utilized grants in several areas and it would be good information to know how much in grants the PD currently have in their budget.
There are numerous websites that publish which federal grants are available and where they go. Each year the federal government publishes grants for a variety of purposes such as child safety, technology advancements, traffic safety, gang suppression, etc. Most cities and counties apply for the grants but few get them. The deadline for applying is usually at the end of June. Around August or September the grant awards are announced. Typically San Jose used to receive millions of dollars in grant funds for law enforcement.
With the downturn in the economy even the largest agencies rarely exceed a few hundred thousand. And, keep in mind the grant funds cannot be used for things that a city or county would normally have to pay for from their general funds. Rarely are monies available for fleet upgrades, staffing, etc. as this is “supplanting.” Once in a while there will be grants for staffing but as with this latest one, there are matching funds required and time limitations. This doesn’t mean that agencies should not apply. In fact, SJPD has benefited repeatedly over the years from staffing grants.
Here is where you fill find most law enforcement type grants: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/funding/index.html YOu can look at previous years and see who got what.
There are 3 ways for Figone to leave City Hall and her rein of arrogance, deceit, lies, bullying , threats, vindictiveness and terrorizing employees to end
1) Council fire her, probably will not politically happen since she has information Council would not want public. Mayor and Council lacks backbone to publicly fire her
City Charter SECTION 702. Removal by Council.
The Council may remove the City Manager from office at any time.
2) Council strongly encourage her to announce her retirement in next 60 days The best alternative
3) Pass word to her that if she has not retired soon ( 60 days ) the voters will start a recall campaign
Council will not use their little political power and less campaign funds to defend her, so will suggest she retire which she will
City Charter SECTION 703. Removal by People.
The City Manager may be removed from office by the People of the City pursuant and subject to the provisions of Section 1604 of this Charter.
SECTION 1604. Removal of City Manager.
The electors of the City do hereby reserve the power to remove from his or her office the person holding the position of City Manager. The provisions of the Elections Code of the State of California governing the recall of holders of elective offices of cities, as they now exist or may hereafter be amended, shall be applicable, insofar as the same are not in conflict with this Charter, to the removal from his or her office of the person holding the position of City Manager, the same as if the position of City Manager were an elective office; provided, however, that:
(a) To initiate proceedings for the exercise of said power, the petition shall be signed by duly qualified electors of the City equal in number to at least the same percentage of the number of persons eligible to vote according to the last report of registration filed by the County Registrar of Voters with the Secretary of State, which is in effect at the time the notice of intent to circulate the petition is published, as is required for recall petitions under the provisions of sub-section (c) of Section 1603 of this Charter.
(b) If a vacancy occurs in the office of City Manager after a removal petition has been filed, no election need be held;
(c) There shall be no nomination of candidates to succeed the incumbent in the event the incumbent is removed from office. If the incumbent is removed from his or her office pursuant to the provisions of this Section, a successor shall be appointed by the Council.
No person who has been removed from the office of City Manager pursuant to the provisions of this Section shall be reappointed thereto within a period of four (4) years from and after date of such removal.
Alex Gurza is now the Deputy City Manager and when Figone leaves…guess what???
The City Manager will lose her job over this one.
Not unless somebody besides Pete Constant decides to step up and challenge her over the decision. Too bad this city council doesn’t have the guts to stand up to Deb or Chuck.
There was an interesting Citizens Blog on Bay Citizens.org late last month. Maybe this is the answer as she has completely struck out: http://www.baycitizen.org/blogs/citizen/san-jose-city-manager-must-go-1/
Boys and Girls:
This is the kind of mess you get yourselves into when you believe lying politicians.
Once upon a time, long, long ago, politicians told you that there was plenty of money to buy you all the paychecks, sick days, pensions, healthcare, and sugar plums that you little blue hearts desired.
They lied to you.
Steely eyed, no-nonenses, take-no-prisoners, tough guy union presidents told you: “They’re hiding the money from you! They’ve got plenty of money to spend on sugar plums for us!”
Tough guy union presidents were just making it up. They don’t know squat about budgeting. They were only showing you their big union tough guy steriod muscles.
They lied to you.
So, the bottom line is: politicians lied to you and you beleived them.
Sorry. You’re screwed.
There’s no more money to put in your supperdish.
When politicians tell you that they love you, they’re lying.
When union presidents tell you that Chuck Reed is hiding money in his underwear, they’re lying.
When union presidents tell you that the public loves your union and will vote for you to have the money in Chuck’s underwear, they’re REALLY lying to you.
But, you have to admit, they know how to lie with sincerity and conviction. They really look like they believe the lies they’re telling you.
Bottom line: you’re screwed.
But, I’m repeating myself.
No, you’re screwed and so are all the other residents of San Jose who now live in a City which doesn’t have enough cops to avoid the inevitable “tipping point.” Maybe you should try a little of your smart rhetoric when some thug is stomping you downtown for your wallet. Don’t you get it? The cops are already losing control. They were already down almost 200 before the 66 were layed off. They’ve gone from 1400 to a little over 1100. We’re in serious trouble. This isn’t about your political rants, it’s about real people getting hurt.
> No, you’re screwed and so are all the other residents of San Jose who now live in a City which doesn’t have enough cops to avoid the inevitable “tipping point.”
I’m sure things are not as bad as you suggest.
If things were that bad, I’m sure that many public spirited police officers would take less money and more modest pensions and work extra hours to help out the community that they love and where their families live.
It’s really demeaning to conscientious public spirited police officer to suggest that they’re just “bargaining unit mercenaries” only interested in making a buck.
“If things were that bad, I’m sure that many public spirited police officers would take less money and more modest pensions and work extra hours to help out the community that they love and where their families live.”
First of all, over 60% of SJPD members do not live in San Jose, nor probably Santa Clara County. This is for two reasons. One, it just isn’t fun to stand in line at Safeway with the gang banger you arrested last night. Sure, there are some communities in the U.S. where the cops take home their cars and play Little League with their families along with those they serve. San Jose is a big city with big city crime that is only getting worse. 5th Column you need to stop staring at the Norman Rockwell cop paintings and wake up to reality.
Second, despite financial misinformation spewed by the various cop haters here, a police officer in SJPD is not going to qualify to buy anything but some fixer upper dump one bedroom condo in a bad part of town. So, most cops who have families choose to move where they can at least afford a single family home in a reasonably crime free area. This means they commute many hours to work and don’t have to worry about their loved ones being victimized in their homes by the thugs they have arrested.
Lastly,just like the private sector, supply and demand set pay and benefits. If every other agency was laying off, taking pay cuts, and reducing pensions, then SJPD members might not really have a choice. In fact, those that anticipated a possible layoff, and those that were laid off, are receiving job offers right and left from agencies that pay competitively, have similar benefits, and have the added bonus of welcoming these highly trained officers with open arms and appreciation.
So 5th Column, despite your glee at watching San Jose spiral down the crime toilet, you eventually will pay for your myopic biased anti-police stance.
I wish you the best! Hope you enjoy your fine city that many of us have served. The city council failed you and so many officers. I hope any and all officers that can take other jobs to leave San Jose and move their families. This is not going to get better and a select few could not care less about your jobs.. (like the mayor, city manager and most of the city council)
Oh, things are bad now and will only get worse. When you call and there is nobody to respond to your plea for help I hope you remember your comments.
This is not a threat but reality. Not enough officers to answer calls, get use to calling a non emergency number to take your complaint.
> After the way the public has turned on us? I guess you want it all, right? You want our money, you want our pensions, you want our benefits…and then you want our extra time?
Yup. You’re finally getting it.
Except, it’s not YOUR money; it’s MY money.
I’m just using it to pay you.
I’ve decided I’m using too much of it to pay you.
> You-are-out-of-your-mind.
I’m out of my mind because I don’t want to overpay you?
Not at all.
I’m perfectly rational because I know I can get the same or better service from other providers without your insolance, insults, and uppity condescension.
“If things were that bad, I’m sure that many public spirited police officers would take less money and more modest pensions and work extra hours to help out the community that they love and where their families live.”
After the way the public has turned on us? I guess you want it all, right? You want our money, you want our pensions, you want our benefits…and then you want our extra time? You-are-out-of-your-mind.
Hey Retired, would you support the hiring of CSI employees at half the price of cops? I like the idea what would be your thoughts? San Francisco just released a class of these officers.
Here 5th Column, here is the two nickels that you have contributed towards my retirement. I’ll even forego the bazillion times that amount that I paid into Social Security for all the years prior to being a public servant that you get to collect on while I do not. Just take your two bits and beat feet.
@fifth column of no sense
I can only place on you the wish you have for others. It shall come around.
Oh, and by the way, every week the rank-and-file is receiving emails from agencies all over the state seeking to solicit officers away from SJPD. There are plenty of other agencies around the state which pay better, offer better benefits and treat their employees better than San Jose. I’m not saying that there’s going to be an abrupt mass exodus from SJPD. I expect that the exodus will be much as it has been the last 8 months or so: a steady trickle, with every officer that leaves taking with him or her $175,000 in training investment.
You are right OfficerD. This is what the Kool-Aid drinkers just don’t understand. Somehow Reed and Figone have convinced San Jose residents that the pay and benefits in San Jose were so outrageous and excessive that “reigning in” these costs must be accomplished at any cost. As a result, many citizens were willing to jump on the slash and burn bandwagon believing that public safety members would shake their heads and mutter “damn, they found us out.”
The problem is, there is a high demand for trained public safety workers all over the state, and in other states as well. While San Jose was busy cutting off its nose to spite its face, those public safety workers were not quaking in fear because their “scam” was revealed. In fact, they were submitting applications elsewhere and being encouraged to abandon the sinking ship that is the City of San Jose. Other agencies are hiring at similar pay and benefits or in some cases, even better. Painfully, those agencies are saving huge amounts of money themselves as each public safety employee has already completed many months, even years, of extensive training all on San Jose’s dime.
Would that this folly be revealed at a greater pace you would see Reed and Figone given their walking papers. That saddest part is that Reed will term out and Figone will find another sucker to hire her before the shit really hits the fan. The biggest losers in this charade are not the union members, it is the citizens of San Jose.
Figone had a second chance to do the right thing when Councilmember Constant sent her a follow-up memo asking her to reconsider the decision. The memo clearly specified the process for amending the application and had the amendment form attached and details on who to contact in DC to properly submit it.
From what I heard Figone didn’t even bother to give a written response to him.
San Jose deserves better, time for her to go or be pushed out to retirement by Council
“The San Jose City Manager Must Go”
http://www.baycitizen.org/blogs/citizen/san-jose-city-manager-must-go-1/
” Ms. Figone’s budget caused great turmoil, uncertainty and despair for communities and city workers. Her negotiators at the table did not negotiate, but issued ultimatums. Her staff refused to talk with the Friends of the Mounted Police and others. She has spun a web of discontent that was only partially and not completely obviated by the Mayor’s minimal budget restorations. These tactics are distasteful and counterproductive to building a city in difficult times.
The case could go on and on. Clearly, San Jose deserves better. ”
Yeah, yeah. We know.
San Jose cops are wonderful.
And they should be paid wonderful salaries, and benefits, and retirements because they’re so wonderful.
We have heard all of the talking points. ALL OF THEM!
Over and over.
We’ve heard the talking points.
Got it!
There’s no money. Get over it.
I hope she goes on to destroy another city and collect yet another pension. Get real, she craps 100 dollar bills. She could care less about officers losing their jobs.
You obviously do not know her and her love for this City.
@ To Great
“You obviously do not know her and her love for this City.”
When you say “love” for this City, you do mean a slang word for “fornicate”?
Thanks for the daily chuckle I felt like I had done 100 sit ups and tears were running down my face I laughed so hard.
The PD Union and crappy politicians screwed the people … thank you Chuck for getting some of it back!
$180,000 total compensation per cop per year is excessive … it should be half that like the rest of the country.
Can we all ask for something positive here for our town?
George and Debra please come together.
San Jose is worth it.
I looked on the Internet, and people like this guy against their stadium calls us a “ghetto town.”. We are not a ghetto,Bill. San Jose is a city of thousands of families from Pearl Avenue to The Alameda. They are worth protecting.
You should really coming down to reality and sampling the real streets and what is going on. armed robberies are occurring everyday. Yes multiple robberie EVERYDAY! wake up you moron!
> You should really coming down to reality and sampling the real streets and what is going on. armed robberies are occurring everyday. Yes multiple robberie EVERYDAY! wake up you moron!
From Boo Hoo PD Union:
> $180,000 total compensation per cop per year is excessive … it should be half that like the rest of the country.
The choice is NOT between $180,000 cops and no armed robberies, or NO cops and lawless no-man’s land.
The choice is between $180,000 cops stopping armed robberies, or $170,000 cops stopping armed robberies.
I’ll take a chance that the $170,000 cops can handle it, AND we can use the savings to buy other important things, like, say, more cops.
Why is this so hard for you to get your head around?
It’s like you’re going out of you way to try NOT to understand.
“It’s like you’re going out of you way to try NOT to understand.”
When you can’t get it through their heads, the real cause is because they DO NOT want to understand or know the truth. They have some other agenda and that is the government employee, themselves. That is their target and no matter what you say or try to explain, their focus is on the employee and how they do not like them; therefore, you are wasting your time trying to explain. They will NEVER understand. They are incapable of understanding past their small mind and focus.
Once again, you fail to grasp the nature of the free market economy. San Jose’s police officers are not beholden to the city in any way. They are free to seek employment in other cities – cities which are more fiscally responsible, cities which pay better wages and benefits than does San Jose, cities which treat their employees in a more ethical manner than does San Jose. Apparently, you and others on this blog fail to grasp this basic notion: people qualified and willing to be police officers – or firefighters – are a diminishing resource. Competition to attract those individuals is stiff. Agencies throughout the state – indeed, across the nation – do their utmost to solicit qualified officers from other agencies as this is the most cost-effective means of recruiting officers to accommodate attrition or the needs of an increasing population. Dozens of officers have left San Jose over the last year or so to lateral to other agencies across the state and as far away as Texas.
San Jose used to do this also, just a few years ago. It no longer does. It now enjoys a national reputation for being an unethical, irresponsible, and untrustworthy employer – a reputation for which the voters are as much to blame as the leadership in City Hall
> a national reputation for being an unethical, irresponsible, and untrustworthy employer – a reputation for which the voters are as much to blame as the leadership in City Hall
I agree. San Jose cops are much too good for San Jose voters.
I think the cops should take up all those other fiscally responsible cities who are pursuing them with $180,000 job offers like horndogs chasing bimbos in the Clinton White House.
My advice: make ‘em sweat. Hold out for $200K or $250K.
After all, you guys are worth it. Your union has said so and they wouldn’t lie to the public about this.
”A blog post on San Jose Inside this week suggested Figone might have, “felt some council members couldn’t be trusted to walk away from money.”
President Beattie then states: “If this hypothesis into the city manager’s thinking is correct, one has to wonder why we have a City Council at all?” Is this the best the POA President can come up with – playing off an anonymous blogger quote? Come on man…you have an in-house attorney ($100,000+) and a political consultant ($75,000+)…your membership deserves better than this.
As stated above, I’ll take a $170K Officer stopping robberies over a $180K officer, well guess what, the $170K officer could care less about the robberies. As they say in the Fire Department, “let it burn who cares!” The City could give a crap about us, why should we care! Good luck residents you’ll need it!
Reed isn’t asking for $170k officers, he wants to pay far less than that. If you read his proposals, he basically wants to buy a BMW at Hyundai prices. He thinks that he can slash pay and benefits and the same high quality candidates will still flock to San Jose instead of better options elsewhere. As OfficerD said, it is a free market economy in public service just like the private sector. The good companies attract the best candidates and the poor companies take the scraps. San Jose is well on its way to having the bottom of the barrel cast off police candidates that can’t get hired elsewhere. It used to be the other way around, but no more. I am sure glad I moved out some years back. Good luck.
> well guess what, the $170K officer could care less about the robberies.
What a strange world you live in where a cop costing $170K won’t stop a robbery, but one costing $180K will.
Is there a stock exchange somewhere where cops post daily quotes for stopping robberies, chasing down yard sign thieves, or eating doughnuts?
How much would it cost us for a cop to beat up a college student in a dorm and expose the taxpayers to a megabuck lawsuit? Or, is that a no charge service that the cops provide as part of their collectively bargained recreation benefits?
While we focus on Figone and her inability to keep the city council informed about how they could have kept the majority of those young officers laid off. Our, boss John Stufflebean has decided to pull the plug and leave for greener pastures. This was the same “John” who less than 3 months ago was claiming
we should all share the pain, well guess what, he decided the pain was to much and has resigned. No big deal you say, but this was Mr Greenjeans himself, Reed and the City Council gave this guy a 250 grand loan as a recruitment tool, and six months to pay it back if he resigned.
Even those that SJCC hoped would lead them on the golden path is leaving. Figone and Garza and the rest have done a very good job at making SJ the most unattractive employer in the state.
To all those officers who have been laid off I wish you well.
SJ paid a competitive executive wage so he came. SJ is not anymore, so he moved on. The free market at work.
City Managers are in an interesting role. For most communities, the part-time councils are wholly reliant on the long serving city manager (and staff) to inform, guide and implement policy. Budget matters large and small are handled by these folks who tend to be fiscally conservative (let’s build up reserves, control expenses, watch revenues, etc.)
In a way, these folks are the real mayor, working behind the scenes over decades to steer the course of the city. A great example would be former SJ city manager A.P. “Dutch” Hamann. Look him up.
As SJ grew up in both population and political sophistication, they went to district council elections and eventually a strong mayor hybrid system where full time council members and staff shared power with the city manager, becoming micro-managers on some items, but still leaving big stuff to the professional staff. That came unravelled with former Mayor Gonzales, who came into office with enough poiltical capital that he forced the retirements/departure of both CM and RDA director to replace with hand picked folks who knew he was calling the shots.
In the Reed era, its drifted back towards a strong city manager, but again, SJ is politically like a kettle of boiling water, and its hard to unboil the egg once its been scalded long enough. So Figone is nominally independent, and should likely outlast Reed, but she also serves at the pleasure of the council and mayor and so is aligned with both the Reed majority faction on some issues as well as the city’s senior staff (which make up a powerful, politically savvy faction themselves, though never elected.)
All in all, good political theater, but not the most functional hybrid design for a mid tier major American City. Structural deficits abound and the system has actually gotten somewhat worse since term limits rolled out (though it has led to a better relationship with the County as most Supervisors are former council members, some of whom would like to be mayor.)
Anyway…I think that Figone might actually be doing her job to the best of her ability, looking out for the long term fiscal health of the city and making some tough calls. Politically, though, she blundered by not seeking the advice and consent of the counsel prior to declining to apply. She’s in a tough spot with a lot of feel good politicians and others trying to get her to free up money for their pet projects or factions and she has to think about a few decades into the future and not just 2 years until the next election.
Maybe the grant woulda been great. Seems like the Federal government under both parties loves to demonstrate they care about law and order by funding more cops with federal grants (Clinton did it, Bush did it, now Obama is doing it) but it seems like its all funny money deficit spending and dries up pretty fast leaving the communities responsible for the COLAS, Merit Step increases, pensions, salaries and all the rest.
I think SJ wants more than it can afford. Like a homeowner who shopped with their eyes and not their pocketbook, we’ve gotten ourselves into mortgage we can’t pay and are underwater. Either revenues have to go up or expenses down. We’ve cut for 10 years in a row. Why not just do a petition drive for a public safety benefit assessment district with a $10 parcel tax and save your officers that way? Bring real revenue to the table (if the voters go for it) rather than funny money from the federal government with strings and traps.
” Why not just do a petition drive for a public safety benefit assessment district with a $10 parcel tax and save your officers that way? Bring real revenue to the table (if the voters go for it) rather than funny money from the federal government with strings and traps. “
Why not ? City will take public safety $10 per parcel tax and give to police and fire then take same amount from police and fire general fund budegt ans spend taxes on non essential services or political tax giveaways
Same as state and federal govt do more taxes no benefit except to politicians and their friends getting tax dollars
Dems – govt employees, teachers, union company bailouts and union jobs public infrastructure construction projects
Reps – corporations, developers and sport owners
Politicians and govt employees – higher pay benefits and high pensions and double dip jobs, high paid contracts and consulting jobs
Taxpayers – higher taxes and govt imposed licenses charges and user fees for less less services