February 14, 2008

San Jose’s budget woes

Community claims study process flawed

Consultants don’t focus on public ideas

By Carol Rosen
Editor

City Council chambers were crowded on Tuesday, when three items on the agenda concerned the city’s budget and its structural deficit.

Many of those attending were there to complain that the $200,000 consultants the city hired had not left any room for neighborhood association and community ideas, but instead given the public, in meetings and phone surveys, limited choices. Several claimed they were not allowed to ask questions or speak to their neighbors at meetings and, in general, had concerns about the process itself.

Seven people spoke about the neighborhood association meetings, all saying they expected more and felt confined to the limited surveys designed by the consultants. “I have a concern about the process,” said Helen Chapman from the Shasta-Hanchett neighborhood. “I think it should be vetted more thoroughly, that the consultants were rushing to meet a deadline.”

Another called the survey “unreliable.” Former city budget director Bob Brown-stein said the “budget is a reflection of people’s values and concerns. We need a process that allows residents to talk with each other.”

Council members, however, acknowledged that Mayor Chuck Reed has opened up the budget process, and is the city’s first mayor to allow the public as well as city employees to provide input with ideas and priorities.

“This is only the second time we’ve done this. Next year it will be different. ‘It’s not the end, and not the beginning but the beginning of the end,’” Reed said quoting Winston Churchill adding “there are limits to what you can get from people on Saturday mornings.”

He agreed with council members that neighborhood groups and city employees needed more time to discuss their ideas. Using Councilmember Sam Liccardo’s ideas to break up the groups into smaller pieces.

Structural deficit
At the end, the council members accepted the consultant’s report and moved on to discuss the mayor’s budget shortfall advisory group recommendations. This is part of Reed’s three-year plan to eliminate the city’s expected $137 million deficit during his term.

In a memorandum to council members, Reed suggested a three-pronged ap-proach; to build revenue from economic development or increased taxes, to re-duce services and to implement cost controls by limiting employee raises and benefits.

Council members agreed that there needs to be a solution to the deficit, but questioned how to get there. Liccardo noted that community interaction is required, “the bottom line is that we have to have interaction from the community beyond the two minutes in city council meetings. There must be consolidation to work together without constraints.”

In addition, once the budget deficit is eliminated, how does the city maintain the balance, questioned Forrest Williams. “We need a permanent source that we can depend on and the community has to be on board so we all agree.”

Nearly 15 public speakers provided their views on Reed’s ideas. Again, people suggested that there has been minimal input from San Jose’s citizens and employees. Decreased wages could send many city employees to the poor house, suggested one speaker.

“The city is managing expectations and there are no real discussions,” said another. Brownstein added that an effective battle plan means that all ideas need to be on the table. “We need to talk to each other and not at each other. We will only achieve our goal if dialogue takes place before the message.”

Others stressed the importance of revenues coming into the city. San Jose residents need to shop in San Jose to eliminate tax leakage. Dennis King suggested the city stress that citizens buy at San Jose stores to boost the city’s revenues. “If people spend their [U.S. government] rebates in San Jose, it could generate $1 to $2 million,” he added.