On day one at The National Alliance to End Homelessness conference on youth and family homelessness, my enthusiasm started to wane after eight hours of meetings. One thing is clear, though: Nobody really knows how many homeless youth there are in the country, but we can’t wait around for the research before doing something about the problem.

Last Friday, Joint Venture Silicon Valley (JVSV) hosted its annual State of the Valley. I was one of the 1,000 people in attendance at the convention center. JVSV started in 1993, during a recession, to promote economic growth through public-private partnerships. Several interesting demographic statistics were pointed out during the presentation.

The recent incendiary headlines regarding the California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) employing “lobbyists” was another attempt by opponents to avoid substance and attack the process of building our nation’s first high speed rail system. Make no mistake, this isn’t an abuse of taxpayer money and the holier than thou statements of some pundits are simply cowardly political attacks on very good people.

As someone who embraces public service as an integral part of the American social contract, it dismays me when government moves to minimize the voice of the people it represents. Case in point: The recent flirtation with folding 20 volunteer City Commissions into five. Yes, that’s five.

Today I am headed to Los Angeles to attend a national conference focused on ending youth and family homelessness by 2020. The National Alliance to End Homelessness has worked hard to draw attention to not only ending chronic homelessness, but addressing the different approaches in working with youth and families.

I hope we can agree to stipulate that American jobs will require more cognitive ability today and in the ensuing decades than ever before in American history. Therefore, the push for higher academic standards for all public schools logically follows. Yet when I try to connect the dots among the issues on the American agenda for education, to increase cognitive skills for its system of public schools, I get these Whiskey, Tango and Foxtrot (WTF) moments. 

For this weeks blog, I am continuing the discussion about providing a fixed percentage of the budget towards police. A nickname for this might be, “We Get, You Get.” The name refers to when the aggregate budget grows, then funding for the most critical service a city can provide—police—would grow. (Providing a sewer system is a close second for the most critical service).

The quixotic Occupy movement needs some real leadership now.  While most of us share the concerns of the movement and have marveled at their ability to highlight issues that have really caused our economic pain, the immature and needless violence against people and property is hurting their cause and is ineffective in creating the change they seek.

Today marks my 150th column for San Jose Inside. It has been a bittersweet experience to write these posts for these last three years. I wish to thank Dan Pulcrano for the opportunity he has given me, an elected member of the Santa Clara County Office of Education Board of Trustees, to be heard on a variety of public education issues. One of the most important issues currently at hand is who will become the next county superintendent.

Elected officials come and go, and with that so do certain priorities. It seems that with every budget cycle, certain departments have to prove their worth and their existence. But why should support seesaw when something is so important as the Social Contract? I recommend that the city should commit to a specific police budget each fiscal year. San Jose should allocate a fixed percentage of the budget to the police department that is higher than the 34.7% today of an $885.8 million general fund budget.

One of Governor Brown’s budget trigger cuts for California is the $72 million spent on the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ, formerly the California Youth Authority). The governor is proposing to shut down the state juvenile justice detention system and send the youth back to the counties for rehabilitation. On the surface, this seems like a good move—DJJ has a horrible reputation for punishing wards and providing little rehabilitative services.

It is fundamentally wrong in a representative democracy to allow a minority to game the system and stop progress because they don’t like the result. The tea party is an example on the national level and the efforts of the ironically named Santa Clara Plays Fair is another.

With the passage of Senate Bill 654 (SB654), authored by Senate President Pro tem Darrell Steinberg, cities in California would retain Redevelopment Agency’s (RDA) tax increment financing to build more affordable housing. The entire Legislature is set to vote on the bill.

I watched football this past weekend with the intent of writing my weekly SJI column on the lessons the NFL divisional playoffs can give us about improving public education. Fortunately, I was up close and personal for the historic victory at “The Stick,” watching the 49ers beat the Saints on Saturday with my son, Zack, as a gift for his 30th birthday.

Last week I attended a disturbing meeting. Not a City Council meeting or a committee meeting but rather a meeting with law enforcement on child pornography. I did not know what to expect. The Silicon Valley Internet Crimes Against Children (SVICAC) is responsible for investigating cases of web-facilitated child pornography and cases of child sexual exploitation or abuse that results from contact over the Internet. There is a small team that works in this capacity that presented at the meeting. A San Jose Police Department officer gave a very informative presentation, and the seriousness of the content was striking.

The 2012 election season is in full swing, but that isn’t stopping some members of the media from looking two years down the line at San Jose’s 2014 mayoral race. A recent Mercury News article details the complex and sometimes turbulent relationship between Mayor Chuck Reed and Dave Cortese, San Jose’s former vice mayor and a current county supervisor. The best part of the story comes near the end, when both men diagnose each other’s political swagger.