Forget Meg Whitman…San Jose’s police and fire unions were the biggest losers in this past election. Meg Whitman can take another $140 million out of petty cash, but San Jose’s police and fire departments may not soon be able to recover from the damage that they have done to their reputations. Frankly, I’m not sure that the rank and file have any idea how much damage they have done to their trust relationship with the San Jose public. The rhetoric employed to try and defeat Measures V and W will likely not be forgotten for quite some time.
Arguments against Measure V and Measure W were based on the false and misleading logic that passage of both measures would have diminished the level of public safety. “Measure V puts your family in harm’s way by cutting fire, police, and paramedic services,” read a campaign mailer funded by the San Jose firefighters and police officer’s association. Another one read, “Measure V is a smokescreen that puts you and your family’s lives in danger.” The citizens of San Jose saw through these lies and passed both measures by healthy margins in an effort to restore some balance (and sanity) to public sector wages and benefits.
The argument was advanced that, “cuts to police will mean fewer cops patrolling our streets…” But of course, that’s completely false. If salaries are frozen and/or everyone contributes more to their pension plans, the cost savings could be used to hire more employees, or at the least, prevent additional layoffs.
There was also the very troubling case of the “councilman and the missing lawn signs.” It was reported that three unmarked police cars showed up at Councilmember Oliverio’s home after he was seen removing “No On V” lawn signs. (Oliverio was not cited, and maintained that he had lawfully removed the signs.) But let’s just assume for a moment that the councilman had violated the law by removing the signs. Does that “offense” warrant sending three unmarked police cars to his home? Does anyone believe that this was an appropriate action by the police? The entire incident reminded one of a scene from a movie, you know, one of those bleak movies about rampant corruption in some large, non-descript American city.
Pierluigi is in the least guilty of misconduct and deserving of a reprimand in the least. He used something normal Joe citizen doesn’t have to avoid arrest, his position in the council. How dare you gloss over it Pete.
This site even tried to say that this was a “grand scheme” put on by the measure v and w’s campaign manager. Wow, really? You guys really expected everyone to believe that? That Pierluigi was nothing more than a manipulated mook, with no more self will than a dead fish.
Sure, and Santee Claws will bring me presents this year.
> This site even tried to say that this was a “grand scheme” put on by the measure v and w’s campaign manager.
Who sent the unmarked police cars to Councilmember Olivero’s home?
Was it:
A. The police dispatcher?
B. Members or leaders of the San Jose police union?
What do you call a society in which the police union, and NOT the constituted civic authorities, dispatach police units?
A. a police state?
B. corrupt?
C. politics as usual?
What do you call police union members who show up at a political opponent’s residence on the initiative of the police union?
A. a private militia?
B. vigilantes?
C. rogue cops?
>Who sent the unmarked police cars to Councilmember Olivero’s home?
If they’re unmarked, how do you know they’re police cars?
> If they’re unmarked, how do you know they’re police cars?
Pete Campbell said so, and Pete Campbell would not fib about such things:
“It was reported that three unmarked police cars showed up at Councilmember Oliverio’s home after he was seen removing “No On V” lawn signs.”
And he reports below in a response that he was mistaken.
> As tom points out, it’s normal for police to wait for you at your house after speeding through a residential.
Normal . . . only if you are number one on the police union’s political enemies list.
I’m sure Pierluigi read this column, especially since it refers to him. Perhaps he should come on and post what really happened that day. He is heard and seen in the video stating that HE was calling the Police Chief.
Pete, How do you know who actually sent the Police to his house? Did the Police go out at Pierluigi’s request, or the consultant who wanted to make a citizen’s arrest? Did Pierluigi ask them to come his house for protection perhaps, or was it because he was speeding from place to place to lose the consultant who were trying to keep track of him so he wouldn’t get rid of the signs before the Police got there?
Pete, I think your column is unbalanced and makes statements that aren’t fair. You really should do more research before writing something as bias as this.
When I hear things like “Unmarked Police Cars” and “The devil(v&w campaign manager) made me do it” I have to just say to myself, “What a bunch of conspiracy theory nut jobs”
I’m laughing to myself while typing this, because once you’re at this level you can REALLY start laying the bullshit on thick. Here’s a new one you guys can print…
Friday November 12th, 2010, Pierluigi Alludes to how signs got in his trunk
San Jose City Councilmember Pierluigi Oliverio released a statement with indications to how the controversial No on V & W signs were found in his trunk.
“Aliens were controlling me with their cosmic rays” He stated, as he was walking out of the Harborside Health Clinic.
Police were unable to disprove Pierluigi’s claims, although Chief Davis did release in a statement that any citizens worried about “Cosmic Mind ray control” should immediately run to their kitchen cabinet, grab a roll of tin foil, and wrap it around their heads.
“It’s common knowledge that foil is an excellent shield against cosmic rays of all types.” said Davis. “We should all take care not to fall under it’s effects like Councilmember Oliverio did”
DA Dolores Carr said the DA’s office could not prosecute in cases with mind control rays.
The aliens were unreachable for comment.
The the OMCL Project (Orbital Mind Control Lasers) was one of the few bright spots of the recent Bush administration.
> What do you call a society in which the police union, and NOT the constituted civic authorities, dispatach police units?
> A. a police state?
> B. corrupt?
> C. politics as usual?
How about:
D. banana republic
> What do you call police union members who show up at a political opponent’s residence on the initiative of the police union?
> A. a private militia?
> B. vigilantes?
> C. rogue cops?
Well, if it’s in the western hemisphere, North or South America, or the Caribbean:
D. “the junta”
San Jose, in the Americas? That’ll work.
I hadn’t quite thought of it like that. Who did dispatch the police to the Councilman’s home? The union strategist fella is the one who witnessed the Councilman removing the sign, was he the one who called in the troops so to speak?
Hmmmm
Pete,
If you want to hand down a scolding you should maybe get you facts straight. There was absolutely not three unmarked units sent to Oliverio’s house. This fact is easy to prove as it is recorded in the cad computer system. This incident was handled by the numbers and was to a “T” appropriate action by the police. He was not cited or arrested but an investigation was conducted as required by law.
I hope your statements in this blog are just based on bad information and invoked some unwarranted emotion. I do hope you will do some homework and apologize to on duty police who did nothing wrong here. If you want to report false accounts of current events go work for the Mercury News. Some of us like the alternative media like San Jose Inside to get away from biased fact-less reporting.
I stand corrected on the word, “unmarked,” however, I will apologize to no one. There was no need to send three police cars.
> There was absolutely not three unmarked units sent to Oliverio’s house.
Oh. So there were three MARKED units sent to Oliverio’s house.
> I do hope you will do some homework and apologize to on duty police who did nothing wrong here.
And, wee the on duty police officers who reported to Oliverio’s house members of the police union?
I rest my case.
Pete,
It is normal for at least 2-3 officers to respond on reports of reckless drivers speeding through residential neighborhoods, especially when they have committed other acts, such as stealing.
> It is normal for at least 2-3 officers to respond on reports of reckless drivers speeding through residential neighborhoods, especially when they have committed other acts, such as stealing.
If it’s normal “for at least 2-3 officers to respond on reports of . . . [campaign sign] stealing” then the SJ Police Department doesn’t have enough to do and is overstaffed.
If someone is recklessly driving around my residential neighborhood stealing stuff out of front yards I fully expect a couple officers to show up and take enforcement action. Do you mind people stealing things out of your front yard? Would you expect the police to respond to take action if you witnessed a thief stealing from your front yard and you could identify the thief?
You are absolutely right; nobody has “testified” that the signs were taken from front yards. There again, nobody has “testified” that they were taken from public property either. Testimony, is making a statement under oath. Statements to police officer and testimony are not the same thing. Typically testimony would be in a court room. Pierluigi Oliverio has used the privilege of his office in an unethical manner. This matter will never make it to a court room where the facts would have been revealed thanks to Pierluigi crying to the police chief and city attorney.
From my understanding there are witnesses who pointed out where the signs had been removed from front yards. We will never know for sure because this matter will be swept under the rug.
If this had been say a transient instead of privileged council member who had been accused of s petty theft from the front yard of a nice Willow Glen home, this matter would be handled in a completely different matter. This is a double standard. No transient has the police chief, mayor, city attorney etc, on speed dial.
Maybe Pierluigi is guilty, maybe he isn’t. In my opinion, his actions are those of someone who appears to be of at least acting in a guilty manner.
Has any person testified that signs were taken from front yards? Answer is no. They were removed from public property which is an eyesore.
DECERTIFY! said, “If it’s normal “for at least 2-3 officers to respond on reports of . . . [campaign sign] stealing” then the SJ Police Department doesn’t have enough to do and is overstaffed.”
Exactly! So why did Oliverio call them and waste Police resources? Don’t you think his abuse of his position, as a Councilperson, by calling the Chief of Police is excessive when the Police are understaffed and need to focus on more important things like murders, rapists, and gangs?
Stop scapegoating everyone else for Oliverio’s immature, bad, arrogant behavior. Hold HIM accountable for this incident, not the Cops.
> So why did Oliverio call them and waste Police resources?
Oliverio called the cops?
“Hello, Police Department? I have a stolen political yard sign in the trunk of my car.”
“Send three police units over to my house and check me out.”
Glory be!
I like a punctilious sense of ethics in a politician.
Hell hath no fury….
Right on!
It certainly shouldn’t take 3 cops to subdue a sign poacher.
No-one has claimed there was any reckless driving through neighborhoods. Whgat is your non-point?
“Does anyone believe that this was an appropriate action by the police?”
No Pete, I do not.
I think the police should have gone further and at the very least given Pierluigi a citation for theft. If the police were so heavy handed, Pierluigi could have been arrested. Instead, he is treated with a double standard and released. Must be nice to have the police chief and city attorney on speed dial, and then have a captain show up for a garden variety thief.
Pierluigi, the mayor, Pete Constant, and the media can put any spin they want on this. What Pierluigi did was morally, ethically and legally wrong. It is sickening how willing so many are to turn a blind eye to what he did, to further their own cause. If a police officer had been caught stealing her opponents signs then speeding off in her car, the call for her firing from the same corners where there is now silence, would be deafening.
Steve,
Very true. Well said.
The police could not legally cite him unless they personally saw him remove the sign(s). He claimed he removed them fropm public property, which every citizen is entitled to do. If they disbelieved him, they could investigate…yet another waste of police resources in a right budget environment.
This entire episode is juvenile nonsense.
John,
I realize you are a lawyer but you are wrong on this. Citizen’s arrests happen all the time in which the violator is cited or arrested by police although they did not witness a crime. Most commonly, this happens in loss prevention at retail stores. A security officer places someone under citizens arrest that they saw commit a crime. They are then turned over to the police and cited or arrested if that is what the security wishes, as they have made the arrest and will need to tesify in court. On the video someone clearly states they are placing Pierluigi under citizens arrest yet he was not cited or arrested. Maybe you think this is waste of resources but to me there is a much bigger issue than that of Oliverio taking down signs. I think this should play itself out in court because if Pierluigi was taking them from private property as alleged he needs to answer to this as anyone else would.
Okay, if you guys really want to know what happened and who called the police.
Put a “Public Records Request” in to the City of San Jose for the date of the incident, dispatch time, who made the call, and so on…
It’s a federal law under the freedom of information act. The agency has a certain time frame in which to respond with the information. Give it a shot? It’s free!
Then post it here! That will settle this crap.
Old Frank
> It’s a federal law under the freedom of information act. The agency has a certain time frame in which to respond with the information. Give it a shot? It’s free!
> Then post it here! That will settle this crap.
Just fell off the turnip truck, Frank?
How long has it been since the federal government acutally gave a crap about complying with federal law?
If the Attorney General of the United States is not going to enforce the Voting Rights Act, Immigration Laws, or Drug Laws, why is any one going lift a finger to respond to some annoying little piss-ant “Freedom of Information” Request.
“Get out of my office.”
About time for everyone to take a breath and stop accusing others
The city, Murky and public safety unions were all out of line and all make misleading, false or questionable statements to try to win the V and W election we will have many dark days in San Jose if this unacceptable political behavior continues
Really disappointed by the key players – elected officials, unions and city administration while Murky continues it’s unprofessional, biased and political muckraking with false information, twisted facts, innuendo and personal attacks to achieve their political objectives
Sooner Murky goes out of business, the better for San Jose
V & W Campaign on ALL sides – Unacceptable,
Agreed. The only thing I’d like to add is that the Unions responded like they did because for months the yes on V and W campaign demonized them, and scapegoated them for the City’s financial mess instead of negotiating with them in good faith, and IN public so we could see what really goes on behind closed doors. I think ALL negotiations on wages, medical, and retirement should be done publicly so we know who is really holding up the show.
Secondly, the Mercury News has spent years bashing the SJPD and even the Fire Fighters to the point of nausea. The Fire Fighters and the Police were treated unfairly through this campaign, and their attempts to educate the public on their wages, benefits, and the concessions they offered/made were ignored by the Mercury and other medias. I just don’t now how they are getting a way with it.
I honestly believe that the economy has brought out the true ugliness of everyone. People are losing their jobs, their homes, their medical benefits, their retirement, and they are being harsh on Unions out of sheer envy and misinformation perpetuated by the media, big business, and government officials.
At no time during this financial melt down has the gross overspending of government or business truly been addressed. Government and big business packed the ballot with taxes, guised as fees, and other measurers that passed on their screw ups to we tax payers. It is a dam shame that they get a way with this. Please people wake up and start holding government and big business accountable before it is too late.
The Mercury News sucks, but having no daily newspaper covering Santa Clara County will be even worse.
Kevin,
I think that is debatable! I’d rather have facts and honest reporting than the crap the Merc doles out.
I’m not so sure.
My comment “I’m not so sure” was misplaced. it was meant to respond to Kevin O’Keefe, not to respond to Kathleen
The “Yes on V and W” Campaign ( Reed, Oliverio Constant, Pegram/Pellman) all said that passing both measures would reult in the City being able to preserve Police and Fire Jobs and make the City safer becaseu it would create the opportunity for the City to Hire more police officers and Fire Fighters.
In the aftermath of the election that showed overwhelming public support for both measures and presumably a public that wants a safer city with more police officers and fire fighters why is the City Manager (Debra Figone) budget projections for the 2011 – 2012 fiscal year call for eliminating 65 more police positions and closing another fire company/station resulting in about 15 more fire fighters jobs gone? Figone is in the process of revising the projected budget shortfall from $40 million to $70million and rising. There is a strong possibility that if the short fall climbs past $70Million she will be looking to cut the PD by 90 or more.
Who do you believe now? The City that said V and W would allow more hiring? Or the “Union Thugs” that said there would be more cuts?
Paul Moore,
Well said. And if people were paying attention they’d see that lay offs in other departments are happening even though these folks negotiated in good faith and took the 10% cuts requested by the Mayor.
What hasn’t been addressed is the City’s overspending and their business unfriendly requirements, taxes, and fees! I know many companies that have left SJ and gone to Campbell, Santa Clara, or Sunnyvale just to survive! It is no wonder we lost tax revenue and City workers like janitors that we really need!
If there are police department lay-offs, then the size of the lay-offs would be even greater if V & W hadn’t passed. Basic arithmetic, really.
The Mayor and the rest of the “yes on V and W” campaigners said that passage would allow the city to be safer because they would be able to hire more.
They did not say “we are laying off a lot if the measures fail and a few if they pass.”
It seems to me that the City was laying off either way, but they told the public they were hiring if the measures passed – that makes what they said a lie. Remember that they lied to you about this and they will lie to you about other things.
The public was sold a bill of goods that the City will not deliver – if they ever intended to. The citizens will ultimatly get everything the “union” said would happen slower response times and reductions overall in service.
To quote Chuck Reed: “We are well beyond the the days of saying ‘We are the City that does more with less.’ ”
We’ll never know what might have happened have the measures failed will we?
Kevin,
The City said V and W would prevent lay offs and allow them to HIRE more Police, which is BS. People in Unions took the requested cuts and are STILL being laid off. What part of misled escapes you? What reductions in spending BESIDES employee cuts has the City made?
They paid out 1 MILLION dollars to put this measure on the ballot INSTEAD of trying to negotiate with the Unions, and even though they got the 10% concessions they asked for. Hello!
You’re right Kevin. People don’t seem to want to accept that its BOTH overspending and the union/pensions that are bankrupting the city.
I shudder to think what state we’d be in if Measure V & W hadn’t passed.
Why the city manager of San Jose ranks in the top 5 or 6 in state salary for a city with a population of 1 million, yet the city manager of Los Angeles and San Deigo don’t rank in the top 20.
Both LA and SD have larger population yet neither of their city managers make close to $300,000 a year not including benefits…yet our City Manager does.
But it’s the police and fire departments fault…get real.
I can tell you right now that the City Manager attended our briefings last week to inform the San Jose Police that 65 officers will be getting layoff notices.
When asked why, we were told that the budget increased from 40 million to 70 million. No explanation was offered how the budget could have grown by over 30 million in a few short weeks.
Since I have been an Officer in this fine city I, along with many of my fellow officers have had layoffs held over our head. It’s disgusting. SJPD has done everything the city has asked. We cut our budget by over 24 million last year and now we are being told that’s not enough.
Kathleen, I apologize for not posting the information you asked for. Between work and the kids my time grew short. I will try to post the information you requested regarding pay/retirement/medical payouts by tonight. I will use the information off my last paystub, I believe this will give you an idea what new officers are being paid.
Kathleen,
Here you go. This information was taken right off my paystub. Hope this answers your questions:
Net pay: $1,795 – 80 hours of work (10/17 – 10/30)
Gross earning – YTD: $ 76,324.28 Net Pay: $ 47,546.61
Before-Tax Deductions
Description YTD
Amount
Blueshield 3,181.92
EyeMed-Vol 169.47
Savings 1,100.00
Retirement 10,528.74
Employer Paid Benefits
Description YTD
Amount
LFeeSwn 0.63
Unempl Ins 296.45
Blueshield 11,389.14
Ben Fee 191.32
EAP 232.21
Basic Life 14.49
Retirement 21,629.88
* Taxable
Total: $34,278.91
You asked me about the different agencies in Santa Clara County and how their pay stacks up against San Jose. I called a friend of mine that works about 15 miles away from San Jose and he gave me the following information regarding his pay. It’s important to know that we both make the same amount of money yearly.
My take home pay per month: $3,590 after taxes/retirement/medical…ect.
My friends take home per month: $6,150 after taxes/retirement/medical…ect.
I appreciate the posters on here that think San Jose is competitive with other agencies in Santa Clara County, but the truth is it’s not even close. People want to know why SJPD officers don’t live in the city….bottom line is I can’t afford to. To have a gross income of $ 76,324.28 and a net income of $ 47,546.61 for a difference of $ 28,777.67 is not competitive with any agency that I know of.
Thank you SJPD Officer. You put your life on the line for us everyday and earn less than most admins, janitors, etc. That’s pretty pathetic and shameful.
Bronco Bummah,
If you want something to complain about try looking at the $300K PLUS annual salary of this guy. It is outrageous to think that Police Officers who put their lives on the line everyday makes less than an EA, but a School Superintendent makes this kind of green. Disgusting..
http://www.mercurynews.com/saratoga/ci_16630935?nclick_check=1
“Gross earning” – YTD: (10 months) $ 76,324.28
Employer Paid Benefits:(10 months) $ 33.754.12
Total compensation (10 months): $ 110.078.40
Total full year compensation: (x 12/10): $132,094.08
Total Health/Medical
Blueshield $ 3,181.92
Blueshield $ 11,389.14
Total (10 months) $ 14.571.06
Total full year medical: (x 12/10): $17,485.27 (13%)
Total Retirement
Retirement $ 10,528.74
Retirement $ 21,629.88
Total (10 months) $ 32.158.62
Total full year retirement (x 12/10): $38,590.34 (29%)
TOTAL COMPENSATION: $132,094.08 !!!!
TOTAL MEDICAL BENEFITS: $17,485.27 (13%) !!!
TOTAL RETIREMENT PACKAGE: $38,590.34 (29%)
Pretty darn fabulous, if you ask me.
Your Medical plus Retirement EXCEEDS the gross pay of the average American worker!!!
If your “take home” pay is too small, cut back on your damn pension contributions and don’t retire at age 45!!!
> If you want something to complain about try looking at the $300K PLUS annual salary of this guy. It is outrageous to think that Police Officers who put their lives on the line everyday makes less than an EA, but a School Superintendent makes this kind of green. Disgusting..
I am righteously and appropriately disgusted.
Public employees, almost across the board, live in a very different economic reality space than regular Americans in the private sector.
In the private sector, if you don’t have enough money, it’s because you didn’t deliver a great enough product or service to get enough people to want your product. You try to make a better product or service.
In the government sector, if you don’t have enough money, it’s because you didn’t take enough from taxpayers, or you didn’t take enough from another government program to make your budget larger. You try harder to take more.
And if you take more, you want more, because some other department will want to take your budget.
“Your Medical plus Retirement EXCEEDS the gross pay of the average American worker!!!
If your “take home” pay is too small, cut back on your damn pension contributions and don’t retire at age 45!!! “
He can’t cut back on his contributions because they are MANDATED by the City! Just go away, ignorant ideologues like you are what has ruined this state. The pension problems could have been solved through negotiation, instead Reed choose to demonize the unions.
> He can’t cut back on his contributions because they are MANDATED by the City!
Oh, GIVE ME A BREAK!
EVERYTHING is up for negotiation, and once the union bullies the city into accepting a bottom line number, the money can be structured a zillion different ways to disguise what they are doing and hide all bloated payouts from the taxpayers.
> Since I have been an Officer in this fine city I, along with many of my fellow officers have had layoffs held over our head. It’s disgusting. SJPD has done everything the city has asked. We cut our budget by over 24 million last year and now we are being told that’s not enough.
For criminy sakes! Look at the EFFING California state budget!
The brain dead politicians are wrecking the economy, taxing and regulating businesses to death, and driving the economic producers out of the state and out of the country.
When the economy shrinks, and the productive people leave the state, city’s can afford fewer services and need fewer police officers.
Didn’t the union tell you this?
The campaign statements were based on data that has been revised, due to further reductions in tax collections.
The situation continues to deteriorate.
It’s time to outsource to eliminate the lazy work rules of public employee unions, especially in “blue collar” jobs.
A private contractor can do the janitorial at The Taj Gonzal for at least $10.00 per hour per employee than the bloated city negotiated rate..and they’ll probably lean on their brooms less, as well.
Public employee unions are bankrupting virtually every jurisdiction in this state. Ya know who gave them collective bargaining rights? Our new Governor Moonbeam. Good luck, California, surviving him again.
For the first time in my life I am considering leaving California…before it goes bankrupt due to “entitlements” and public employee union work rules that guarantee at least 50% more workers than are reasonably needed to do the job right.
All this coming from a lawyer? When I got a divorce my lawyer did so little work for the amount I paid him. I found hours that he had billed me a couple hundred dollars an hour and I was able to prove he ripped me off and did not do the work. Clean up your own profession John.
The election sent a mixed message…but the bottom line is that public employee unions are facing a hostile electorate. Even the “heroism” of police and fire don’t count for much with a cynical electorate that has heard too much that doesn’t sound right about pensions.
In Palo Alto – The Firefighters tried a charter amendment for minimum staffing (basically a back door to no layoffs and forcing cuts from everyone but fire). It went down in flames.
The other public employee unions and bargaining units are probably pretty clear that while the police and fire went to bat on the Measure V and W campaigns, it’s a clear mandate to change the deals being offered.
The sad thing is…however…that no one currently on the gravy train will actually pay the price. It will be the younger workers who must work longer for less benefits while current workers transition into very well paid retirement and start drawing benefits they were promised but that no one paid for (except in small part). The “big lie” was that you could raise pension benefits without setting aside money to pay for it. City managers, city council members, mayors, union reps and rank and file all winked at each other and signed off on crazy math like they were taking out a mortgage to by an East Side Mini-Mansion with fake paystubs to and vague letters to certify ability to pay.
The dishonesty of pretending to fix the problem with second tier pensions is insulting. It’s not enough…and can’t be enough to fix current and past liabilities that were underfunded with phony actuarial projections. Someone will have to pay…and the taxpayer is ultimately liable.
Prediction – layoffs, budget cuts and ongoing service cuts for the next 4 years. We’ve been driving towards the cliff and all we did was slow down a little, not change course. CoSJ pension solvency relies on a formula for dramatic growth and new income to sustain obligations for present retirees let alone new one’s cashing out every year. The cost of living adjustment should be the next thing to go…followed by 50-50 co-pays toward pension from all current employees and not just new hires. Can be phased in over 5-10 years, but has to happen.
Also, to preserve core service, it might be time to consider spinning off some from the city as it continues to wither and fail. Could some of the branch libraries be taken over by the county system? What’s the cost/benefit analysis?
“The sad thing is…however…that no one currently on the gravy train will actually pay the price.”
As an officer, I pay almost 25% of my gross salary into our own retirement system. This is the highest percentage of any police department in the United States. This is not something we are paying in “small part”.
> As an officer, I pay almost 25% of my gross salary into our own retirement system. This is the highest percentage of any police department in the United States. This is not something we are paying in “small part”.
Wow! You’re really gonna get screwed!
The money you’re paying in NOW is paying for the fat retirements of people who retired ten or twenty years ago.
By the time you get to retirement, the state of California, and many California cites will be insolvent, and the courts will order termination of all public employee union contracts and mammoth reduction in retirement benefits.
Fifty days ago, Governor Schwarzeneggar signed a state budget that was suppposedly balanced.
Today, the deficit is—surpise—$23 billion! Who knew??!!! The government is borrowing $40 million a day to pay unimployment insurance and by the end or next year will have to pay back an additional $15 billion to the federal government.
On January 1, the Workman’s Comp taxes on business go up %5 percent. This is a “surprise” additional tax on businesses in a state that already has the highest business taxes in the country.
Business activity will go DOWN and not UP, state revenues from business taxes will go DOWN, state bond rating will go DOWN; interest payments on state bonds will go UP, and the budget deficit will go UP, UP, UP!!!!
Thanks to Prop 26, it requires a TWO-THIRDS vote of the people to raise taxes, which will NEVER, EVER happen. So, no tax increases. Forget about it..
Bottom line: YOU’RE SCREWED!
I expect that the police union will be coming after you for a dues increase or a special assessment to fight for a tax increase or oppose another Prop V or W.
So, expect to see 25% of your paycheck going to pay for someone else’s retirment, another 25% and for union dues and assessments for losing political battles, 25% for federal and state taxes.
Which leaves 25% of your paycheck for you, paid in Federal Reserve Notes, which the Obama regime and the Federal Reserve are devaluing as fast as they can get away with.
Boy! Are you screwed! But I’m repeating myself.
“As an officer, I pay almost 25% of my gross salary into our own retirement system.”
That math can’t work. Do YOU pay 25%, or is that the combined of what you pay and the city pays on your behalf?
If you make $100k, at least 20% goes to the IRS, at least 7% to the FTB. Add that to you alleged $25%, and that leaves you only $48k net. I don’t know if you guys pay FICA/Medicare, ets, but if so, your net is even lower. Unless you’re single, you can’t live on $48k net around here.
John,
25% is just my contribution and nothing to do with the cities contribution. Last year the POA voted to increase our GADSB/retirement health contribution by 5%, and this year we voted to increase the amount we pay into our retirement by about 5%. Prior to last year we were already paying over 13% of our gross salary into our retirement. Now it is close to 25%. That has nothing to do with what the city is also paying. We do not pay into social security but we do pay into Medicare. Our contribution amount can all be verified by calling the city or poa. I am not making up these figures nor is there anything misleading. We do pay this much of our gross salary into retirement. That is why so many officers have lost their houses and why so many live over an hour away from here. It is very hard to live on $50-60k net per year in the valley, especially if it is one income or you have kids.
Steve,
Why didn’t this apppear on a POA flier to educate the public during the V and W campaign? People think you’re living high on the hog when that is simply not true.
Since the city pays $8.00 into your retirement for every $3.00 you pay into your retirement, almost 65% of your gross goes into retirement. That means about $65k/year goes into your retirement. Right?
Care to post for us all a copy of your pay stub, without a name, so that we can verify your assertion that YOU PERSONALLY put 25% of your gross pay into your retirement? Candidly, I find that percentage impossible to believe. When you add taxes to that percentage, there clearly isn’t enough left for you to live on. Convince me that I am wrong.
> Why didn’t this apppear on a POA flier to educate the public during the V and W campaign? People think you’re living high on the hog when that is simply not true.
Because, Kathleen my dear, it wouldn’t have made any difference.
Police Officer’s make a fabulous salary with fabulous benefits by valley standards, and the fact that their union chooses to opt for a cadillac retirement plan that requires the officers to put up 25% is not going to get a lot of sympathy from people who are working part time jobs and cashing in their dwindling 401K’s.
“…pension solvency relies on a formula for dramatic growth and new income to sustain obligations for present retirees let alone new one’s cashing out every year…”
Isn’t that the definition of a Ponzi Scheme?
Having police union activists on the police force is like having a virus in your computer.
They are not 100% commiitted to public safety, and the part that ISN’T committed to public saftety is up to no good.
The handwriting is on the wall. The whole idea of a police force of unionized officers who are loyal to the local government some of the time and loyal to the union bosses at other times is absurd.
The abuse of public trust in the Oliverio case is just the first hint of what unionist insider’s can do to screw their political enemies.
The Oliverio episode is the ONLY known instance where THREE POLICE UNITS were dispatched in response to a alleged lawn sign theft, and the alleged perp in the case just happens to be the San Jose Police unions ENEMY NUMBER 1. The police union was obviously trying to bully Oliverio.
If the San Jose Police Association is going to treat the public like they’re all stupid, it’s going to be the end of respect for law enforcement in San Jose.
How is a Police Office witness going to have any credibility in a court trial when it is going to be so easy to demonstrate political score settling by uniformed officers carrying union cards and carrying out the union’s politics while on duty.
It stinks.
It’s time for police unions to go away, and for honest police officers to recognize that as long as they’re doing the union’s stinky politics, the stink is on them.
Decertify:
How is it that you believe you have so much insight about line operations at SJPD when you are absolutely clueless?!
BTW, unions are here to stay. You’re notion of decertifying is absurb and obviously a personal Utopian wish. You may as well put that one under your pillow and hope for a quarter tommorrow morning.
Your attitude is EXACTLY the reason you need to be Ex-Officer X.
Just who the hell do you think you work for?
My attitude? I simply stated a fact. Your knowledge of SJPD line operations is obviously not a strong point, yet you spout like you are an insider. You would fire someone for not agreeing with you? Interesting,…I am guessing the number of persons you supervise is ZERO.
Secondly, I work for the City San Jose, which unfortunately, includes angry anti-police/union morons like you. No headlines there. Am I bullying you too now?
> Secondly, I work for the City San Jose, which unfortunately, includes angry anti-police/union morons like you. No headlines there. Am I bullying you too now?
Yes. I have been bullied by people who work for the City of San Jose and their union cronies.
If you give me your name and department, I’ll tell you how and why you’re a bully.
LOL,…ok, thanks for making my response easy.
I am sure you have been bullied by many people, probably for quite awhile, and I am real sorry to hear that. If you put aluminum foil on your home windows that will keep the bullies away. That and a “BABY ON BOARD” decal for your car may also help. Good luck with the “DECERTIFY!” campaign.
“Secondly, I work for the City San Jose,..”
Oh, so you “protect and serve” the City of San Jose, an entity? No, sir. If that’s what you believe, then you are the “moron” Your job is to protect and serve THE PEOPLE of San Jose, citizens and non-citizens alike. The City may write your paycheck, but you work for THE PEOPLE who give the city the money to write that check.
Go elsewhere, officer. We The People don’t need you or people like you on the force.
WOW,…you truly are obsessed with this notion that SJPD officers are “bullies”. A bit surprising considering how few sustained complaints there are relative to the number of calls handled yearly. Still, you are welcome to your opinion, even if it is unsupported.
For the record, I do not consider it funny. Your obsession is concerning and the fact that you think we target citizens is absurb.
> LOL,…ok, thanks for making my response easy.
> I am sure you have been bullied by many people, probably for quite awhile, and I am real sorry to hear that.
So, you think it’s funny that cops and city employees bully San Jose citizens.
Does the union tell you which citizens to bully, or do you just decide on your own?
You are definitely unfit to be a police officer, and you’re probably not the only one.
“BTW,(police) unions are here to stay.”
If you are correct in your assessment, this State is doomed to total fiscal collapse.
JMOC,
I know exactly who I work for but I am also not a slave. As well I am also not going to provide my name here to those obsessed with destroying unions. Individuals comprise a community and those people make up a city. We get it, relax. In fact, you had your say with regards to V and W. We have accepted that. Relax,…if you can’t, go picket and have your say. Go to council and demands decertification of ALL of the evil unions. The mayor will probably allow you to rant for 20-30 secs before he mutes you.
Unions are here to stay, imho, despite your doomday predictions. It is amazing the US economy has ever prospered based upon your characterizations of unions. How Silicon Valley’s entrepreneurial spirit ever overcame the evil empire of unions is truly amazing.
Pete-
Easy for you to say now that you got yours, isn’t it? Funny to hear such rhetoric from a guy who is collecting a disability pension from the very union he seeks to ruin.
Are you so angry because the whole police department knows you for the crook that you are?
The fact is that Chuck Reed is going to try and reduce staffing now that V has passed. The public will see soon enough.
Wake up!! Pete Campbell wrote this, not Pete Constant. Do you have any idea what you’re talking about? You’re as clueless as Nancy Pyle!!!
San Jose Mercury News Reader’s Letters, November 14, 2010
#1: Officer’s return is a dark day
The reinstatement of the two police officers who were fired becase of their very poor judgement at attempting to shield a fellow officer’s wife from serious charges in not only a black eye for the department, but San Jose as a whole. The perception is we are a city out of control when it comes to ethics.
Gary Sollweg
San Jose
#2: Reinstatement hurts police force
It occurred to me while reading the article on the two corrupt police officers being reinstated that community respect for an organization parallels the theory of the global commons. The police officers get reinstated, gaining the veneered respect of putting on a badge, yet the respect of the entire police force by the community they serve is lessened.
Joe Rich
Santa Clara
and, in the same newspaper on page B3:
“Guards turn on sheriff, want new leader at jail”
Union lawyer takes jabs ar Smith, calls arrangement illegal.
Sounds to me like the Boys and Girls In Blue are not spending all of their time serving the govenment by the people, for the people.
N.C.
Thanks for the jaunt down red herring lane. Your opinions and those of the quoted letter-writers display a degree of willful ignorance and willingness to indulge in fallacious reasoning that is part of the reason why San Jose is in decline. In the first place, and with respect to the officers being reinstated, no criminal wrongdoing was ever established. The decision that they be reinstated was based on an INDEPENDENT hearing by an INDEPENDENT ARBITRATOR who was presented with all the facts both sides believed to be relevant. Furthermore, you and the other commentators act as though these officers were reinstated without consequence. This is also untrue. The were effectively suspended without pay for 11 months.
Lastly, Measure V and W had absolutely nothing to do with the County Law enforcement or DOC. SJPD has nothing to do with the S/O or DOC. The SJPOA has nothing to do with the unions representing sheriff’s deputies or corrections officers. To attempt to draw any connections among these various organizations is disingenuous, intellectually dishonest, and morally suspect. How about if you make at least a passing attempt at staying relevant and on topic?
> Thanks for the jaunt down red herring lane.
Anon1:
I commend you on your superb command of sophistry.
A+ on your term paper! Go to the head of the class.
Now, back to reality. As a sophist, you cherry-picked factoids and constructed a meaningless reality.
The point you missed is that, there as growing sentiment across the community that there is something terribly wrong with the San Jose Police and that they have lost the respect of the community.
It’s not just the creeps, and low-lifes and gang-bangers who have no respect for the Police, it is spreading to the “bitter clingers who cling to their guns and their bibles, and have antipathy toward people who don’t look like them.”, it is working class Christians who are “poor, uneducated and easy to command”, and it is potentially terroristic military veterans returning from Iraq, and it is people who listen to Rush Limbaugh and talk radio.
It’s NOT just a single news item. People everywhere are talking and writing letters to newspapers about the “loss of respect” for San Jose cops.
Normal people feel raindrops, look up at the sky and think “It might be raining.” The union sophists look up at the sky and think “It might NOT be raining”.
It’s raining.
“You don’t need a weatherman to tell which way the wind is blowing.”
“In the first place, and with respect to the officers being reinstated, no criminal wrongdoing was ever established.”
So, it takes a criminal conviction to throw a cop off the force?
THE APPEARANCE of impropriety taints those officers. There is a two-tiered system working that has to stop. If you or I were drunk and plowed into innocent people we’d be in jail taking it up the as* right now.
Your nome de blog should not be Anon, it should be Clueless.
So, now it’s ad hominem attacks? Way to stay relevant.
hhmm, was “Officer X” one of those reinstated?
Actually, no, but thanks for your concern.
A number of POA supporters have brought up the fact that they contribute 23% of their salary toward their retirement fund. They think this somehow proves that they are justified in deserving their ‘90% of salary’ pension payout. What they fail to mention is that while they are making their 23% contribution, the City (we taxpayers) is matching that with a whopping 61% contribution. Who WOULDN’T be happy to put $23 in the bank knowing that somebody else would add $61? Heck, I’d contribute 100% of my pay if somebody else was going to match my contribution at a ratio of 8:3.
A public safety employee who has a salary of $100,000 is actually being paid $161,000/yr. when we count the pension contribution.
The unavoidable truth is that in order to support and fund 90% pensions, a pension fund needs to be contributed to at the rate of 84% of salary over the course of a 30 year career. This is ridiculous and unsustainable. It is unfair to taxpayers and compromises every other service that the City offers to it’s residents.
Only 4% of officers ever retire at 90% in San Jose. The vast majority are between 60-70% and that is after they have beat the shit out of his/her body for 20-25 years, and are at least 50-55 years old minimum. In your blind hatred, and those of others here, the actual facts are completely twisted. You are dellusional and completely full of crap if you think the city contributes $61k a year for each officer’s retirement. The mayor, Pete “I collect a disability retirement” Constant, and Pier “I have the chief on speed dial” Oliverio, have done a magnificent job of propaganda and trying their best to destroy the reputation of all the great guys and gals at the police department. It is truly, truly sickening.
So set me straight then Tom. I tried to engage you in discussion on this several weeks ago but you ducked out on me.
You’ve repeatedly claimed that officers contribute 23% of their pay toward their retirement? Is that figure correct?
I’ve been given to believe that the City matches it’s employees’ pension contributions at the rate of 8 to 3. Is that inaccurate?
Doesn’t 23 X 8/3 = about 61?
If an officer does happen to tough it out for 30 years isn’t he eligible to receive a pension in the amount of 90% of his ending yearly pay?
If the pension fund comes up short doesn’t the City have to make up the difference?
These are reasonable questions. They’re not prompted by “blind hatred”. Chuck Reed (who was endorsed by the SJPOA), Pete Constant, and Pierluigi Oliverio did not stir up the people. It was the other way around. The people stirred them up. They’re doing their jobs by listening and responding to the legitimate concerns of the people. I applaud them for it.
John Galt,
I want your help with something. Where is everyone, including you, getting the idea that Police Officers get 90% of their pay when they retire, AND that they can retire a short time after they are on the force? This is simply NOT true!
The figures I see thrown around by you and others simply DO NOT match the pay check stubs I’ve seen from Officers. Look at the above post:
SJPD Officer Mon, Nov 15, 2010 – 6:03 pm. Are you going to claim he/she is lying?
Please enlighten me on where you guys come up with this stuff.
Kathleen,
No, I don’t think SJPD Officer is lying. Bronco Bummah already accurately analyzed SJPD Officer’s paycheck stub. You ignored the substance of Bronco’s post and instead changed the subject. You dismissed his analysis without really running the numbers. Well, his analysis SUPPORTS my position.
“Where do we come up with this stuff?”, you ask. From the facts, Kathleen. From the facts.
I appreciate your committment to your community Kathleen, but you have a habit of thinking with your heart and not with your head. The numbers, the math, the dollar amounts, the percentages… You can’t ignore them. They ARE important. They are what this discussion is all about.
John,
I asked because I value your thoughts on things.
From one softhearted fool to another, I respectfully disagree about my ignoring the facts, and changing the subject. I have seen “real life” pay checks of these public servants and I can tell you one thing for sure, their take home pay after all these deductions are WAY less than you are touting. It’s a dam shame that we give so little value and support to those who put their lives on the line for us everyday.
Many Police Officers give up time with their families, miss holidays, their children’s Birthdays, and anniversaries to be treated like deposable garbage. Many Officer’s marriages end in divorce because they are never home. Now we even punish them for needing a wage they can survive on.
I find it odd John that dedication to public service, like teaching, was once a profession we as a society valued. Boy have times changed since I was a kid.
Kathleen:
Here’s what SJPD Officer’s pay stub REALLY says:
TOTAL COMPENSATION: $132,094.08 !!!!
TOTAL MEDICAL BENEFITS: $17,485.27 (13%) !!!
TOTAL RETIREMENT PACKAGE: $38,590.34 (29%)
If SJPD Officer lived in a two income household with a spouse with a similar paycheck, the Obama administration would classify them as “rich”, and be fighting to raise their taxes in the name of “fairness”.
> Now we even punish them for needing a wage they can survive on.
Oh PUH-LEEZE! They’re RICH!!!
Give it up, Kathleen.
Calling Bronco Bummah, come back to planet earth!
I guess you missed the TAXABLE part and this:
“My take home pay per month: $3,590 after taxes/retirement/medical…ect.”
Net pay: $1,795 – 80 hours of work (10/17 – 10/30)
That’s 14 days X $128.21429 per day= $1,795 X 2 weeks= $3,590.00 per month!
You call that RICH?
You give it up Bronco!
BTW-I have a friend who is a Security Guard working for a private company and he makes more than that! He gets a 401K and medical/vision/dental, (His contribution to those benefits are minimal compared to this Officers!) OT, PAID sick leave, and vacation too! When HE retires he will get Social Security and Medi-Care if our government doesn’t bankrupt it first.
Nice try, but the $250,000 household income is based on Gross Income, not income + benefits. Dual income at that rate is $76,000 x 2 x (12/10), or $182,000.
Also, those who argue for keeping the highest tax bracket at historically low levels keep misleading people (or maybe they really don’t understand). The increase in tax rates for income above $250,000 only applies to the portion ABOVE $250,000. So if you make $251,000, your taxes wouldn’t change appreciably. If your household income is $260,000, you continue to pay the same rate for the first $250,000 and only pay the higher rate on the final $10,000.
> Calling Bronco Bummah, come back to planet earth!
> I guess you missed the TAXABLE part and this:
You are correct, Kathleen. I DID miss the tax angle.
And that makes the case even more absurd.
The sneaky tax avoidance trick “negotiated” by the unions is that much of the compensation package is in “employer paid benefits” which are NOT taxed as “gross income” to the employee.
If ALL the gross compensation were paid directly to the employee the employee would have a higher tax bill.
So SJPD Officer’s TOTAL COMPENSATION of $132,094.08 is significantly tax sheltered.
It is probably equivilant in value to a FULLY TAXABLE compensation package of, say, $150,000!
GOD, THESE PEOPLE ARE GREEDY, and SNEAKY!!!
Bronco,
We can agree to disagree on this. Try watching a Council Meeting sometime to educate yourself on reality here on planet earth.
You’ve chosen to twist the truth and ignor his take home pay to make yourself look right so enjoy floating in outer space.
BTW- How many fake names are you posting unde on this site?
John,
Okay, you want FACTS and Figures so let’s do the math:
“My take home pay per month: $3,590 after taxes/retirement/medical…ect.”
Net pay: $1,795 – 80 hours of work (10/17 – 10/30)
That’s 14 days X $128.21429 per day= $1,795 X 2 weeks= $3,590.00 per month!
Let’s not forget he is being TAXED on his retirement and benefits too!
Even you have to admit that is NOT a lot of money for the job he performs.
I have a friend who is a Security Guard working for a private company and he makes more than that! He gets a 401K and medical/vision/dental, (His contribution to those benefits are minimal compared to this Officers!) OT, PAID sick leave, and vacation too! His take home pay is $4.500.00 a month! When HE retires he will get Social Security and Medi-Care if our government doesn’t bankrupt it first.
By the time this Officer retires, if he doesn’t die or get seriously injured in the line of duty, the money he will earn won’t be enough to live on in this rotten economy. Ask any retired person how they are fairing. Not good my friend given that many of their pensions were lost during the stock market crash, and the inflation rate has soared so high, they are being forced into taking on a part time job to survive!
Also, if you had viewed the Council Meeting regarding the recent BONUS checks to retirees, you’d know that many are on housing, and/or barely making it. Only a small few are earning over $100K.
Just a side note: My friend worked for an airline for 40 years and when they went bankrupt he LOST everything! He is just one of many I know about.
Also, I was watching a Council Meeting this morning. They were discussing retirement payouts. Did you know that these are projected costs and that in REALITY the City is now SAVING money due to lay offs? Remember the key word here is projected not ACTUAL costs to the City! They LAID off people BEFORE they could retire. Sickening don’t you think?
Kathleen,
We could argue endlessly about whether police and fire salaries are too high, too low, or just right. Not only is an objective answer to that question unattainable, it’s irrelevant.
The difference between their take home pay and your or my take home pay, pales in comparison to the difference between his pension and your or my pension. Or your security guard friend’s. It’s that unbelievably generous pension payout that separates public safety workers from the rest of us. The 90% pensions that they can enjoy after 30 years- or the 60%-90% pensions they “earn” after just 15-30 years. THAT is the difference between them and us. And it is a huge difference.
To not have to consider, every day of your working life, whether you’re saving enough for your retirement. What a concept. The security. The certainty. What a priceless luxury that must be.
And not so much as a ‘thank you’ from those to whom we’ve given this gift.
John Galt,
I think you and others are missing the point here. We can respectfully agree to disagree on this because if a Police Officer can’t survive on his/her take home pay NOW, or God forbid dies or gets injured in the line of duty, what the hell good is a pension? If that Officer loses his/her home, spouse and family because he/she is never home, or misses out on his/her children’s Birthdays, and holidays simply because he/she is working hard for a secure future, what the hell good does a pension serve in the long run?
These public servants put their lives, and financial well being on the line trying to protect and serve us. How can you or anyone else understand or put a price on that, unless you have served yourself, or been in the military serving your country? You can’t, so how can money be more important than these heroes and their many sacrifices to us? (Money, by the way, that they contribute to heavily themselves, and are TAXED on like the rest of us.)
You say, “And not so much as a ‘thank you’ from those to whom we’ve given this gift.” Yep, that is a sword that cuts both ways my trusted friend. I’m sure those Officers are asking that very question right now about why they stay and serve us with all the sacrifices they make for us everyday just to be treated like garbage. It truly is a very sad commentary on how we treat our heroes both morally and financially. We have looked the other way when it comes to government overspending and are scapegoating these TAX PAYING, innocent employees who do contribute their fair share. That is just wrong, in my opinion.
So, let’s forget for a moment the debate over whether or not San Jose’s citizens and leadership believe that public safety employees are worth their pay/benefits packages. Let’s instead consider the market for public safety employees.
In 5 minutes of searching, I was able to identify four agencies in the Bay Area which offer pay/benefits packages which are equal to or superior to those offered by San Jose: Redwood City, Palo Alto, Fremont, and Santa Clara. Furthermore, based on what I was able to learn, these agencies all have officer/citizen ratios higher than San Jose’s current 1.2/1000 and closer to the national average of 1.7/1000.
To me, this begs several questions:
1. What are these cities doing right that San Jose is failing to do?
2. Why is it that they are able to afford better pay/benefit packages for more officers per capita than San Jose.
3. Where is all of San Jose’s money going?
San Jose’s public safety services don’t exist in a vacuum and wages and benefits aren’t numbers Houdini’ed out of thin air. They aren’t even competitive with many other agencies, although they used to be closer to competitive. And yes, these other agencies ARE hiring, unlike San Jose (which has been atriting officers due to retirements and lateral transfers to more competitive agencies).
This begs one final question: taking these verifiable objective facts into consideration, how does San Jose’s leadership intend to compete with these other agencies and hire AND retain the best and brightest candidates?
The answer? Well, you won’t get a meaningful answer from Debra Figone or anyone on the city council. They honestly don’t have answers to this very relevant question. You won’t find this question answered by PLO in any of his posts. Figone was recently asked point blank aobut staffing levels by a friend of mine and she didn’t have an meaningful answer.
But, these are the questions anyone concerned about the quality of life in San Jose SHOULD be asking and for which answers ought to be demanded.
Don’t worry, bro. You are right that San Jose does not exist in a vacuum. The same thing that is happening here in San Jose with the dwindling tax base is happening in other places as well. If the cities you mentioned haven’t yet felt the affects of this, they will when they realize that they can’t afford these extravagant retirement package any longer.
These municipalities will have to pay the piper sooner or later for making these sweetheart deals with the unions. My bet is it will be sooner rather than later.
“To me, this begs several questions:
1. What are these cities doing right that San Jose is failing to do? “
Spending their taxes on core services – not money losing downtown, non profits, low income housing, bailing out community groups, decade of grossly overpriced city construction projects, pathetic economic development that does not pay back taxes or produce decent jobs, sports teams with poor city lease deals and yearly subsidies to insiders , money losing sports facilities , money losing museums and theaters with sweetheart leases and subsidies, free city property leases, corporate subsidies and millions to housing developers
2. Why is it that they are able to afford better pay/benefit packages for more officers per capita than San Jose.
They don’t waste taxes on nice to have stuff or political paybacks
3. Where is all of San Jose’s money going? ” SEe 12 & 2 above as SJ has highest business and retail costs and taxes to drive tax revenue and jobs to other cities