The two city council meetings held last week regarding the budget and labor negotiations demonstrated the need to make all labor negotiations public. If you are interested, you can click on this link and see for yourself the drama and trauma that took place that still does not have closure. This week’s meeting, June 22, will hopefully close this chapter.

Thirty minutes before the San Jose City Council went into closed session to decide whether to impose a 10 percent pay cut on public employees, Councilmember Pierluigi Oliverio addressed the large group of union members and other citizens gathered for the meeting.

“If you’re angry, it’s ok to be angry,” Oliverio said, “because the system is all screwed up.”

Last Tuesday, the City Council decided to delay its vote on the 10 percent wage cut for city employees, after five unions provided a counter-offer that they claimed would be the equivalent of the proposed cut.

However, after studying the offer, City Manager Debra Figone and City Attorney Richard Doyle determined that it was unacceptable. Figone recommended the city impose the cuts and implement the Mayor’s budget proposal.

The motion passed on an 8 to 3 vote, with council members Pyle, Kalra and Campos opposing. The Council deferred action on wage and benefit concessions with the five labor unions until the Council meeting of Tuesday, June 22.

It’s getting to be like a game of chicken. On Tuesday evening, City Council decided to delay its vote on the 10 percent wage cut for city employees after five unions provided a counter-offer that would be the equivalent of the proposed cut. They are now ready to study the offer, and to meet again on Thursday or Friday to decide whether to accept it.

The 2009-2010 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury today released a 33-page report titled Cities Must Rein in Unsustainable Employee Costs that says, “Employee costs are escalating in the cities of Santa Clara County, revenues are not keeping pace with these increases and cities are cutting services.” The Grand Jury looked at rising wages, health insurance, pensions, and vacation, holiday, and sick leave and made recommendations to control costs.

The Good News: The City has a counter offer from seven out of 11 unions to take a temporary reduction in compensation (by paying more of their pension contribution temporarily on a pre-tax basis). The Not So Good News: The offer is equivalent to $14.6 million of the $118 million deficit, thus layoffs and service cuts are inevitable.

The “Not So Good News” reminds me of what Bob Brownstein said at the meeting I attended about the budget deficit hosted by the labor unions last month: “Layoffs are unavoidable since the deficit is so large.”

San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed seems to be headed for a showdown with the city’s unions over the way union pay negotiations are settled. In a May 5 San Jose Rotary Club speech, Reed called publicly for a revision of the City Charter in an audacious move to wrest power away from the unions representing the city’s firefighters and police force. Harking back to his days as a labor lawyer, Reed pointed to a clause in the Charter that forces the city into binding arbitration if and when negotiations with the unions break down.

This year, the San Jose City Council is forced to make drastic cuts. Unfortunately, the city of San Jose has had a deficit for the last decade even before the Great Recession. In fact, even without the recession, San Jose’s financial obligations are significantly higher then revenues coming into the city.

As a result current elected officials are left with trade offs often having to pit necessary services against each other. This year the deficit is $118 million. This is more then the entire library, transportation, planning, code enforcement, information technology, city attorney and public works departments combined.

A joint Mercury News/KGO TV poll indicated that Santa Clara’s Measure J (The 49ers’ Stadium) is likely to pass. Weeks prior, a poll was commissioned to measure the level of support among voters for a baseball stadium indowntown San Jose.

QUESTION: When will some agency or press outlet sanction a poll to ask local residents about their feelings towards breaking the unions’ vice-grip on the delivery of city services? (“Would you support allowing 50 percent of city services to be done by the private sector?”). I’ll bet the “yes” category would approach 90 percent.

Last week I attended evening budget meetings in Districts 3 and 5. The center of our city (District 3) had a high turnout from residents who find great value in community centers. Particularly, the Gardner and Washington Community Centers. Both facilities provide a place to go and where residents can be positively impacted. Classmates and friends of mine from Willow Glen High grew up in the Gardner area, formerly known as “Barrio Horseshoe.” It was a problematic neighborhood with many gang issues.

Last week, I attended budget meetings in council districts 9 and 10 as well as the labor unions’ budget meeting at the Tully library. The people that attended this meeting were mostly union members and city council staff. It was admitted at the meeting that significant layoffs were inevitable since the deficit is enormous.

Ideas were presented on what money-saving measures could be implemented and what new sources of revenue could be found to balance the $118 million budget gap. Ideas ranged from replacing natural lawns in parks with artificial turf (lower ongoing maintenance costs, but more costly upfront) to turning down the air conditioning at city hall during the summer.

The City Manager will release the list of proposed cuts to balance the city budget today (March 29). These cuts are based on no concessions from any of the labor unions nor savings gained through outsourcing of janitorial services (among others) to save money.

Money saved from outsourcing could help pay for library hours or the aquatics program, for example. The question of concessions has been out there for months and could be included in the budget. Agreement would need to be reached in early April since layoff notices would start going out April 19. If concessions are made then some of these cuts could be avoided but in lieu of an agreement in hand here are some of the proposed/likely cuts.

A statewide labor group sent out a sharply worded letter yesterday indicating that it has blacklisted local Democratic political consultant Jude Barry and his company, Catapult Strategies. In the letter, Art Pulaski of the California Federation of Labor (CFL) attacks Barry for “supporting the efforts of an anti-union committee” seeking to qualify a so-called “paycheck protection” initiative.

At last night’s City Council meeting, Mayor Chuck Reed asked all city employees to accept a 10 percent cut to their salaries. Without this, he said, either 450 workers will have to be laid off, or hours at the city’s parks, libraries, and community centers would be “cut dramatically.” Though some City Councilmembers countered with a sliding scale proposal, the Mayor’s request received the Council’s support by a vote of 8-3. The proposed cut would affect all city workers, including police officers and firefighters.

Mayor Chuck Reed had some grim news for City Council yesterday. “Although this is the ninth year we’ve faced a significant budget shortfall, this year is by far the worst.” He went on to warn that the city’s expenses are expected to exceed its revenues for many years to come. The only solution, he suggested, is to cut services to community centers and libraries, and to reduce pay and/or benefits to municipal employees.

There’s bad news for the City Council again. The deficit is up 16 percent and now stands at $116.2 million. The problem, says City Manager Debra Figones, is employee pension costs, and especially the pension costs for retired policemen and firemen. While they were expected to grow by $38 million during the next fiscal year, the estimate has been adjusted and now stands at $53 million. Exacerbating the problem is reduced revenue from business tax receipts, which continues to drop.

Have you noticed, there’s been more than a few angry letters to the editor submitted to the Mercury News by San Jose residents over the past few weeks?  It seems that folks are a bit ticked-off by the present condition of their city, and are placing the blame on the city council and the unions that run them.  (Yes, that’s right…the unions run the council.)