On Tuesday the Council will discuss the fiscal reform proposals that Mayor Reed has researched and constructed. It will not be not an ordinary city council meeting but instead a major discussion being held in big cities across the country. Last week, the Council had a study session regarding the City’s retirement system.  From my view, the presentation given by staff, which included the director of retirement services, Russell Crosby, was one of the best I have seen.  A step-by-step explanation of the retirement system was provided.

There is nothing more satisfying than a grassroots effort to change the world for the better. Parents for Great Education hosted a 21st Century Education Summit at DeAnza College last Saturday afternoon. Even though the attendance was under the 250 that had been hoped for, all participants left with a renewed understanding on the importance of providing all students with 21st century skills while finding new ways to fund California’s schools adequately and consistently.

Although we are entering “road paving season” we have next to nothing for the maintenance of our 2,300 miles of road. This issue was raised at the city council meeting last week. A question was asked about issuing bonds to pay for road paving. To issue bonds you need a source of revenue, such as a tax. For example, the $300 annual parcel tax for road paving that was discussed during the Council study session last year. This parcel tax would require appproval by a two-thirds supermajority of San Jose voters.

A couple of weeks ago, the San Jose city government sent out hundreds of layoff notices to city employees. KRON 4 News reported that 25 percent of the city’s librarians received notices that their positions could be eliminated. The Mercury News reported that the San Jose police officers’ union has offered to cut their salaries by 10 percent in an effort to reduce the number of layoffs. Even with this last-minute concession, San Jose’s police force may still be reduced by 106 officers.

Santa Clara County is on the verge of the beginning of the end of public education as we have known it for the last 100 or so years. I am not intending to be hyperbolic; I’m simply stating the truth as I know it. Will each child’s educational opportunities be enhanced by the shake-up? Or will there be winners and losers?

The Council last week made the second SERAF payment to the state. SERAF is where the State raided all RDA coffers in California—again—in our case taking $75 million from San Jose.

On Sunday and again last night, I saw the Sharks play the best hockey I have seen in 20 years. It doesn’t seem like 20 years ago that my family and I would pile into the car and drive to the Cow Palace in Daly City to watch hockey. I shared seats with a good friend who had never been to a hockey game in his life, until opening night at the Cow Palace.

There is a strong correlation between the effectiveness of the military and the K-12 pubic school system in America. We have the best-trained and equipped military on this planet. We have spent half-a- trillion dollars since 9/11 on our national security apparatus. Our investment and training has paid dividends. Tragically during the same 10 years we have disinvested in public education. This disinvestment is a national security crisis of epic proportions.

The saying, “What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas,” can be said for the City of San Jose’s closed session meetings. In a prior blog, I wrote about what I could of closed sessions called “The Mystery of Closed Sessions.”

Last week’s column, “Let The Education Conversation Begin,” gives me hope. Thank you to all that responded, especially Mr. Stampolis and SierraSpartan for their agreement on a key issue that the education community must address.

Last week, the City Council moved forward with an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the water pollution control plant often referred to verbally as “weepeeceepee” (WPCP). The plant and the land are jointly owned by San Jose and the City of Santa Clara.

There are competing interests on what to do with the area surrounding the plant. Some would like all of open space land preserved for natural habitat for the burrowing owl and other animals. Others would like to the area devoted to large parks with trail connectivity. Still others look to this as an area where San Jose could add office and retail opportunities to increase the tax base.

The intent of San Jose voters (and Measure I) was clear: trade in the old city hall for a new one downtown. Are the citizens of San Jose to be governed by the expressions of the people, or by local politicians’ interpretation of that expression?

Respondents to this weekly column sometimes refer to my writings and beliefs as socialistic due to my general support of teacher unions, targeted use of additional money, and progressive education precepts.  Is Rush Limbaugh a socialist? Have we all succumbed to the opinion of Jonathan Mahler in his recent New York Times article, “The Deadlocked Debate Over Education Reform,” that “false dichotomies have replaced fruitful conversations?” I truly hope not.

I attended the District 5 (D5) community budget meeting last week—it was the third D5 community budget meeting I’ve attended. Approximately 50 people were there, with the majority being city employees.  Many of the speakers shared emotional testimonials.

Dear Mr. Doyle:
Several weeks ago, it was reported that the old city hall property site will be turned over to the Santa Clara County Government as part of a negotiated debt settlement between the San Jose Redevelopment Agency and the Santa Clara County Government.

The events of the last 10 years have been incredibly significant in the shaping of American history:  9/11, Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, Great Recession, the election of Barack Obama, to name a few. One of the most critical of these events occurred on Jan. 8, 2002, with the signing of the No Child Left Behind Act by President Bush.