August 7, 2008

Ballot measures create long meeting

By Carol Rosen
Editor

San Jose’s City Council met Tuesday for the first time since late June with only an afternoon meeting because of National Night Out. However, the meeting delayed many council members from getting out with their constituents because the afternoon session didn’t end until nearly 7 p.m.

It wasn’t for lack of trying. The council had some heavy measures to consider including six measures for the Nov. 4 ballot, a few of which were somewhat controversial. In fact, this session of the meeting lasted more than three hours.

Reduced and updated taxes
The first to be discussed was a ballot measure that reduced and updated the telecommunications users’ tax, which had generated about $24 million per year. The ballot measure if passed by voters will reduce the current tax from 5 to 4.75 percent, possibly lowering the total revenues received. However, it also will broaden the tax base and leave room to reflect technical advances—hence update—to telecommunications uses.

The measure received strong favorable support in a survey conducted at the city council’s request and the council unanimously agreed to place it on the November ballot.

The second measure would reduce and replace the 9-11 fee, which is set to end on June 30, 2009 and was declared unconstitutional earlier this year by a judge. The council had planned to ask residents to vote on it anyway.

This measure will reduce the existing fee to $1.65, down $0.10 per single line and $12.38, down $0.45 on trunk lines. It too was passed after significant discussion, only Councilmember Pete Constant opposed it. A spokeswoman for the San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce suggested that the council should place a cap per business location for trunk lines.

Card room taxes
The third measure, to increase taxes 5 percent—to 18 from its current 13 percent—from the city’s two card rooms, engendered much discussion. Mayor Chuck Reed initiated the discussion by suggesting that the council first talk about adding 18 tables to offset the card rooms’ loss of revenue.

The council was concerned that if they did not provide the extra tables that the card rooms would retaliate with a strong campaign against this measure and possibly end with voters being against all the measures.

Six members of the public testified for the measure including Bob Brownstein from the South Bay Labor Council and Chamber President Pat Dando. Both suggested the need for balance and revenue, and Dando quipped: “If Bob Brownstein and I are making the same statement that is noteworthy in itself.”

Other pro speakers noted that the additional tables would result in new jobs and more revenue for the city.

Two others, however, were not so favorable. One worried about the problems some Asian Americans have with gambling, which can destroy families and homes. The other, Bobby Lopez, president of the Policemen’s Union, had concerns about the crimes related to gambling.

Councilmember Kansan Chu agreed with the problems some Asian Americans have with gambling and said he would not support the measure, and Sam Liccardo expressed concern about overwhelming voters with too many tax issues. “We’ve got the governor coming out asking for a one cent sales tax increase, VTA wants an increase and there are bond measures. I think maybe it’s not time to put this on the ballot.”

Chu added that he felt the situation was like a bribe, and that he didn’t want to be in that position.

The council then voted on a substitute motion against adding the additional 18 tables. Eight council members voted for it, while only Reed, Constant and Pierluigi Oliverio were against it thus taking the entire measure—including increased card room taxes—off the November ballot.

Parkland measure
The fourth measure, which passed unanimously, deals with amending the city charter to allow the city council to enter into agreements for up to 25 years—from the current charter’s three years—for parks over five acres if these agreements enhance the recreational purposes of the park. This would have no affect on neighborhood parks or any park with less than five acres.

There are approximately 176 parks in San Jose, with about 50 of them containing 5 acres or more. This measure would require compliance with city rules and a review process. If the entity was not following compliance guidelines, if there are problems or if it was not following the recreational needs laid out by the city staff, there are provisions to buy back the capital or, in other words, break the long term contract.

The poll taken prior to this meeting showed that citizens were solidly against a fifth ballot measure that would set the mayoral and council member salaries at 80 percent and 60 percent respectively of the salary established for a California Supreme Court justice. So it was no wonder that the council voted unanimously not to put the measure on the ballot.

However, several council members reiterated their desire to change the charter to allow a method of setting salaries other than the members doing it themselves. “We should encourage staff to try to tie the salaries to an independent body,” Vice Mayor Dave Cortese said.

Final battle
The final measure, which also used up a large number of minutes, asked the council to reconsider a measure already passed to ask voters to use Lincoln Glen parkland to build Fire Station 37.

The position, which created confusion among the council members, has to do with an unreported measure in the 2007-08 budget. This was hidden under a line item and put Fire Station 6 land up for sale to pay for Fire Station 37. While the council had earlier decided that the money to build 37 would be found elsewhere the item was never recinded, and Oliverio and Willow Glen residents were concerned that Station 6 might still be removed.

Oliverio suggested that instead the Fire Department find another spot for Station 37 that would allow service to more people in areas in Districts 6 and 9 that currently are under served with very long response times. He proposed the vacant land at Foxworthy and Almaden Expressway would better serve public safety needs.

At least 12 members of the public, a number had already left, spoke of the need for Station 6 and the dire effects it would have on the aging and increasing population in the northern portion of Willow Glen. All suggested it wasn’t a good idea to “sacrifice Station 6 for 37.” One woman brought in a petition with 500 names requesting that Station 6 not be sacrificed.

Several council members appeared to be lost in the concept. Liccardo asked why the city couldn’t build 37 and keep 6. The final vote was six to five with Constant, Chu, Campos and Oliverio voting to remove it. The measure remains on the ballot.