The Council punted the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) budget last week to February 2010. As has already been highlighted in the news, the state is taking $75 million away from San Jose’s RDA. We need to pay the State off in May and identify where the money is coming from in March (no negotiation or payment plans on this matter are allowed by the State). The legislature, recognizing that this payment would be difficult for all RDA agencies, allowed for borrowing from affordable housing money which is 100-percent funded from RDA. Twenty percent of all RDA money goes off the top to the Housing Department in San Jose. The payroll for the housing department alone is $9.7 million a year for 83 employees for an average salary of $117,000.
The Mayor’s Budget message was pragmatic in that it said let’s not spend any money ‘til we work out borrowing the money from the housing department to pay the State; let’s determine whether or not RDA is able to issue bonds to pay for a capital program—which would include matching the hotel owners’ share and expanding the convention center; and let’s continue negotiating with the County of Santa Clara (which by the way in the last decade has been paid $270 million by the RDA).
The Mayor had a very good public meeting with stakeholders from all sides prior to writing the budget message. Everyone who attended realized the choices are difficult and few options exist. Everyone at the meeting got the same information—that San Jose has already built 18,000 units of affordable housing by spending hundreds of millions of RDA dollars making San Jose the number-one provider of affordable housing in the state of California. Everyone left the meeting understanding that there is no pixie dust to magically fix things. A majority at the Mayor’s meeting felt that economic development should be the priority now.
However, when it came to voting on the budget, another option was voted upon at the last minute that asked for a $25 million reduction in how much would be borrowed from the Housing Dept., and instead look at borrowing from other sources. This option was well liked by the audience (which was made up by mostly paid affordable housing lobbyists and people who work for affordable housing entities in some capacity—the Housing Director is campaigning against the Mayor and is ensuring that she has her supporters at the meetings). This “option” would take money by borrowing monies from the following: Commercial Paper backed by the General Fund, Sewage Treatment Plant Connection Fee, Library Parcel Tax, Sewer Service and Use Charge, Integrated Waste Management, Ice Centre Revenue Fund and HNVF-Anti-Tobacco Funds. This “option”—taking from all of these other resources—was approved on a 7-3 vote with Mayor Reed, Pete Constant and myself voting no.
We have borrowed money from some of these funds before, but that was to balance our general fund so we could fund core services like public safety and not more affordable housing. If we borrow this money now to create more affordable housing, then we will have one less arrow in our quiver to balance the general fund budget in June.
My question to you is: Should we use money that is supposed to go towards core services like sewers and water treatment plant so that we can build more affordable housing that does not pay fees for parks or road paving?
How do you feel as a voter that may have supported the library parcel tax to let that money be borrowed for more affordable housing that does not pay property taxes (property taxes is the number one revenue source to pay for city services) versus what you intended that money to be spent on…libraries.
I remember months back Councilmember Constant and I were criticized because we wanted to use the Healthy Neighborhood Venture Fund (HNVF)/Anti Tobacco money to pay for school crossing guards, a public safety service the City has had in place since the 1940’s. It’s okay to use these funds for affordable housing but not for crossing guards? Hmm…sounds like maybe a vote of the people should be had on how these funds should be spent. With a $75 million deficit just for RDA and another $96-plus million deficit for the City’s General Fund, I am all for the residents sharing their votes via the ballot. If we can ask residents to raise their taxes then we can ask them for direction on spending their money.
I now have a Facebook page for my tenure on the city council. Here is the link.
WOW, We taxpayers fund 83 people @$9.7 million/year so bureacrats can sit around and write Bureaucratese-laden memos on how to get housing for the poor? And the AVERAGE salary for these folks is $117k! And that’s just San Jose. SJ is largest provider of low income housing in the entire state?
Time to shift those 83 folks to repairing our roads. OOOPS! They probably only know how to write memos. So, let’s retrain them to use shovels, and to run road building equipment. $9.7 million ought to give us 2 or 3 miles of good roads. If it’s anything like Caltrans, of those 83 folks, 6-10 will actually work (3 will only lay down and pick up the cones) and the remainder will “supervise” all day while eating donuts and drinking coffee.
We know, we know. Every city worker does nothing, it takes teams of people to stand around doing nothing, cultural arts is just a vast wasteland to dump taxpayer monies, etc., etc. Do you have anything new to say? Do you have anything even factual to say? Obviously not or you wouldn’t keep posting the same nonsense again and again. Maybe for the New Year you could post something constructive that would be helpful to making the community a better place. Your constant and inaccurate attacks on city workers is not only old, not based in fact, and it is just boring.
Have a good holiday, though.
And I’ll keep repeating it until all you folks who love to spend other peoples’ money finally get it, and prioritize what government does with limited resources.
Well, at least you didn’t call me a racist.
Race has nothing to do with it. Accuracy does and you ducked that aspect of my comment. I understand why, since most of the scenarios you suggest exist only in your mind.
I am not one of those “folks love to spend other peoples’ money…” I, too, want responsible government and quality work. I just prefer to keep my comments grounded in the real world and not in some silly world of stereotypes that you seem to enjoy.
Lets work to correct real problems and not the ones that populate your world, OK?
You see, JMO. Hyperbole, irony, metaphor- accepted literary devices that renowned authors have used throughout the centuries to help illustrate their point, are all off limits here on SJI.
Why? Because O.Really and the rest of the Thought Police say so, that’s why. There is evidently no value in any commentary that uses these traditional literary techniques.
We can only hope these hardliners first check the Spare The Air rules as they decide which days to burn their copies of the offensive Orwell, Vonnegut, Dostoyevsky, Twain, Shakespeare, and Heller.
John Galt, johnmichael o’connor and the other fatigued griping “regulars” here do virtually nothing but complain. They don’t offer alternative ideas that might make their opposition think. They don’t offer facts to back their arguments. They just bitch & moan and bitch and moan. It reflects their overrated sense of ego and offers little to nothing of relevance to the conversation.
“Thought Police?” There’s not enough “thought” put into their posts for a dime-store security guard to patrol.
EVERY CalTrans job, just go look for an hour and see how little work gets done, ‘cuz most of the folks are standing around; many clerks in the Superior Court clerks office gab on and on with filing service personnel while the line to file documents gets longer; why did it take a contractor friend 4+ hours to pull a simple building permit for a 225 square foot room addition to a residence; parks and wreck folks @ St. James Park moving leaves around from one pile to another for 15 minutes, then talking to each other for 15 minutes before resuming “working”. And the list goes on and on and on…
Thought Police?? Really, John G.? Hyperbole, irony, etc. are “literary devices” and that is your excuse for not holding JMoC accountable for the truth? Commentary is fine and welcome, but so are facts. JMoC continually launches tirades against city workers (no, I am not and have never been a city worker) and others who he claims stand around doing nothing but can he can’t actually cite one actual instance of this occurring. Nor can he cite multiple instances of this occurring. If his point is that we, as taxpayers, don’t want our money wasted, then fine—everyone agrees. Then quit the “literary devices” unless he enjoys continually looking foolish and uninformed and then has to rely on you to try and salvage what he is saying.
“Everyone at the meeting got the same information—that San Jose has already built 18,000 units of affordable housing by spending hundreds of millions of RDA dollars making San Jose the number-one provider of affordable housing in the state of California.”
This also makes us the number-one fools in that department.
What is the city council doing to attract more revenue producing business to San Jose? What is the city council doing to cut the red tape and reduce fees for business to locate in San Jose?
Why is the city council going ahead with plans to annex many pockets of low income, blight ridden neighborhoods from the county when we can’t afford to take care of the current citizens and neighborhoods?
Why do our city council members make $100,000 a year plus full benefits and a car allowance when surrounding cities only pay the council members a stipend?
http://www.mercurynews.com/public-employee-salaries
I think this last message should have also been presented to the public for their input as we will be the recipients of decreased services.
Decreased services?? Hah! All the cities are taking the RDA money and using to make the Good Ol’ Boys richer. Not one locally elected official is unaware of the scandals and the robbery going on. Consent calendars? CONSPIRACY CALENDARS!!!!!
If we had a real expression of civic government like the one we called for in 1998, I would be a county supervisor by now!!!
I have the files!!!
Governments are formed to benefit the public. When an agency, such as the Housing Department, is found to be providing greater benefit to it’s own employees than it is to the public, then it can cynically and truthfully be referred to as a “jobs program”.
Pierluigi is trying to do exactly what we should desire all our Council Representatives to do- protect the PUBLIC interest. For budget savings, he’s right to look to optional programs that are of questionable public value, such as Housing.
Many of those who work in welfare depts. and housing depts. are smart enough to realize that they can get great jobs and benefits on taxpayers’ $$ by becoming, essentially, parasites sucking off the misfortune of others.
So, what is your solution for those who cannot afford housing? Move away? Live on the street? Die? You know everything that is wrong, so tell us what is right and how to deal with the housing problem. Please.
The solution is NOT to spend $9.7 million PER YEAR for people to write memos and propose programs, but to also stand in the way of contractors trying to build affordable housing.
It is NOT a legitimate function of government to level the playing field by transferring money from one group to another, despite Obama’s rhetoric to the contrary.
There is no answer to the housing “problem” except for those who cannot afford to house and feed their kids to stop bearing those children. My office is near the Mexican Consulate. Daily I see women coming there with 3 or 4 kids under the age of 6, who clearly cannot support those kids no matter how hard she and her husband/boyfriend may work. It is not the function of government to pick up the slack for those who carelessly continue to have kids they cannot support. BUT, they know that the governemnt and folks like you will help them out. If YOU want to be charitable, fine. Just don’t you and the government pick my pocket to fix their problems.
There is no statutory or constitutional right to subsidized housing, JW.
People have free will and can live where ever they wish. Why should San Jose build all the affordable housing? One city could never build all the housing for a County or State. You want affordable housing move to my home state of Michigan.
O.Really & Son of O.Really,
Your impatience with bitching and moaning is admirable. Too bad it doesn’t kick in a little earlier. The firemen band together and bitch and moan for 6 figure pensions. No problem. People bitch and moan for you to pay their healthcare and their mortgages. That doesn’t bother you. But when somebody bitches and moans but isn’t demanding anything at all of you, suddenly bitching and moaning is a big problem.
Yes, public vote on tax giveaway programs to good old boy and gal insiders and lobbyists while San Jose get worst
and to Fire – Housing Department and Economic Development Departments They are working against city and public’s best interests by diverting tax dollars to
not needed excess housing tax subsidies
no or low income jobs economic development tax subsidies
I think there are good and bad employees in EVERY business, private or public. I know the City of SJ has some very dedicated people working there. I have had the honor of working with many of them.
It seems to me that the real issue here is why do we keep paying more to get less? And where DOES our tax money go?
PLO,
You lament the Council’s punting of the RdA budget, then turn around and suggest the Council punt expenditure decisions to the voters. Correct me if I’m wrong, but we live in a representative democracy, which means the voters elected YOU to make these tough decisions.
Will you always blow with the breezes from your online surveys, or will you finally do what we pay you “$100,000 a year plus full benefits and a car allowance” to do: GOVERN?
Or maybe you’re too busy combing your hair.
P.S. A civics lesson for “Steve”: San Jose has the only full-time City Council in the county. Councilmembers from smaller cities have day jobs.
and they seem to be doing pretty well…..
Pierluigi seems to be one the of the few elected officials who takes a stand. I think most voters support his priorities however the city council does not vote with common sense. If the city council will not vote for core services then give us a chance to vote on it. As far as what the city council gets paid paid it is much less then others make working for the city and I would say Pierluigi earns it.
Merry Christmas
“Pierluigi seems to be one the of the few elected officials who takes a stand.”
Well, go to our neighboring cities and you can see lots of council people taking stands. That is why Santa Clara is on the verge of getting a 49ers stadium. They only get a stipend for their work. Is taking a survey the same as taking a stand?
“How do you feel as a voter that may have supported the library parcel tax to let that money be borrowed for more affordable housing that does not pay property taxes (property taxes is the number one revenue source to pay for city services) versus what you intended that money to be spent on…libraries.”
I feel pissed and betrayed. If I vote for a library tax, it’s because I want to see the money spent on libraries. If the money is diverted from libraries to some other purpose, taxpayers should get a rebate. Hopefully, some taxpayer organization will sue.
What did 90% of CEOs in Silicon Valley identify as their number 1 issue that needs to be addressed? The lack of affordable housing.
Affordable housing is an economic generator. It provides places for workers to live. It helps companies attract talent from other countries or other parts of the US where housing is much cheaper.
Most of those 18,000 units were built for moderate-income households, like those of Silicon Valley tech workers, not poor people simply looking for handouts. The people that live in these units pay income taxes and sales taxes. The jobs they perform help produce more income taxes and sales taxes.
And, as I remember it, you and Councilmember Constant were criticized for falsely alarming the public about cuts in the crossing guard program when there was no real proposal on the table to do so.
There are two sides to every story. And, usually its through fully appreciating both sides that equitable solutions can be reached. They’re rarely reached by presenting skewed data and half truths to the public.
Then why are large employers like Google, Intuit, Symantec, Boston Scientific, Siemens in Mtn View which is more expensive then San Jose?
Why is Oracle and Electronic Arts in Redwood City which is more expensive then San Jose?
Why is HP, Tibco, SAP,VMware, Agilent, Varian, Tesla, Facebook in Palo Alto which is more expensive then San Jose?
Why is Sun Micro, Tyco, Alza in Menlo Park which is more expensive then San Jose?
T. Chen asks ” Then why are large employers like Google, Intuit, Symantec, Boston Scientific, Siemens in Mtn View which is more expensive then San Jose? “
San Jose is VERY Business Unfriendly and DUMB
1> High Business Costs – with highest business taxes, development fees, user and utility charges and longest business approval process,
2> Worst public services with highest costs
3> Highest crime rates of Silicon Valley cities except East Palo Alto and San Jose downtown is known for drunks, high crime rate and gun shots – Oh yes I want to locate my company in downtown – not unless you give me millions and free land 1 example Sobrano empty hi-rise
4> Labor friendly Council that passes living wage , city wide affordable housing, and other labor high costs for businesses, and challenges business development projects or retail stores hat could bring in millions in taxes so residents go to other cities to shop and pay taxes – 1 example City Hall Retail
5> Worst than even San Francisco and ALL Silicon Valley cites for small business costs and the 3-4 most desirable business areas have very high business improvement fees, higher rents and either poor public transit or fee parking
6> SJ builds excess and affordable housing that does not pay taxes or enough taxes to pay for city services – More housing = more budget problems
7> RDA funds in well managed cities are spend in attracting high income jobs . tax paying businesses while San Jose spends RDA taxes on low income jobs and no tax projects, affordable housing = no taxes, money losing public buildings and events
8> Yes San Jose in some areas has lower business rents BUT few want to locate there since there are no desirable stores, restaurants, horrible traffic jams, poor streets etc which is WHY = Low rents
City staff is either incompetent and then lies to Council about why businesses go to other cites
1 example Tesla, hottest company in US GOT San Jose’s Best Offer PLEASE locate next to garbage dump with nothing around, off 237 with worst traffic in SV, in flood prone area and WAS surprised HQ when to Palo Alto and car factory went to Southern CA
“San Jose is VERY Business Unfriendly and DUMB”
I agree 100%. I have noticed that Los Gatos, Campbell, and Saratoga have all been adding businesses left and right. I have NOT seen very much housing going up. They have left that burden to San Jose because SJ is always building it!
I think it is time the burden shifts to them, and that San Jose start working to bring in more business. And yes, the city needs to find ways to make starting and running a business here a lot friendlier. (I have friends who moved their businesses out of San Jose because they just can’t afford it.)
Don’t get me wrong, I am a strong advocate for low-income housing, but if you don’t have enough jobs for people, what is the point of building housing?
City Senior Staff is like Titanic Band who played to keep the doomed passengers calm until ship sinks under icy waves and everyone left on ship dies
Multi-millionaire Senior Staff responsible for the disaster have their luxury lifeboats ready and will sail away with years of big salaries, raises, bonuses, prepaid health care, 75% retirements and many will get rehired city retiree consultant jobs while SJ gets more taxes with few services or sinks into bankruptcy
SEE 2007 Rehired City Retiree and Consultant Salaries
http://www.sfgate.com/webdb/sanjosepay/index.shtml?appSession=963124756269183
Larry Lisenbee Temp Employee Retiree U $249,189.02
Edward Overton Temp Employee Retiree U $210,903.81
Bonnie Kobayashi Temp Employee RetireeU $131,013.33
Anita Phagan Temp Employee Retiree U $114,843.83
There are many more in 2008 and 2009 plus big Tax money is not disclosed Consultant Contract companies employing city retirees or council staff
Clueless Council will not go down with the city ship but will leave to new political offices consultant, developer, lobbyist, or non profit lifeboat jobs while blaming new Council for disaster they cluelessly created
City Senior Staff is like Titanic Band who played to keep doomed passengers calm until ship sinks and everyone dies
Multi-millionaire Senior Staff is responsible for city disaster but they have luxury lifeboats ready and will sail away with years of big salaries, raises, bonuses, prepaid health care, 75% retirements and many will get rehired retiree consultant jobs while SJ gets more taxes with few services or sinks into bankruptcy
2007 San Jose Salaries
http://www.sfgate.com/webdb/sanjosepay/index.shtml?appSession=963124756269183
Rehired City Retirees and Consultants
Larry Lisenbee Temp Employee Retiree U $249,189.02
Edward Overton Temp Employee Retiree U $210,903.81
Bonnie Kobayashi Temp Employee RetireeU $131,013.33
Anita Phagan Temp Employee Retiree U $114,843.83
If you want to see big undisclosed tax spending look at many 2008 & 2009 rehired retirees and undisclosed consultant contracts employing city retirees or council staff
Kathleen,
You are right “City of SJ has some very dedicated people working there.” who work very hard The problem is not with the workers and direct supervisors they are doing a great job with less resources, more work and staff every year
Senior staff and Council are problem, just look at how they hide where our taxes are really spent,
How much is spent on essential city services vs other city services?
Do you know how many people actually work for city to include city employees, temporary employees, contractors, rehired senior managers, or all other employee and contract categories?
Why does city use the mis-leading term, core city services which is used to describe all city services when other cities only define core services as police, fire , health, safety, sewers, streets etc?
Why does city use non standard performance measures , discontinue performance standards when they can not meet standard measures or use surveys as performance measure which is grossly mis-leading since average citizen does not know how to measure city services or have other city comparisons to look at?
Do we have a lack of affordable housing now that the real estate market has corrected? From what I understand house prices and rent have dropped substantially since 2008.
Also, is it necessary for the city itself to build more units? I There are hundreds of foreclosed houses in the city. Building more houses would further depressed the market. It would be cheaper if the city to outright buy distressed property, fixing them up then rent them out. Plus the city could sop up inventory, speeding up the recovery.