By Mark Ruffing
In our new world of upside-down mortgages, the building of the new City Hall—and now the resulting debt service to pay for it—has become the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. Individual City departments are expected to pay approximately $1.1 million per year toward the debt service for the new City Hall. That’s $1.1 million per floor, multiplied by 18 floors at the City Tower, and additional floors at the City Hall Wing. Meanwhile, the old City Hall lays vacant.

Sometimes I feel I am living in the Twilight Zone. Is it strictly science fiction to think the common school curriculum supported by leaders in education, business and labor will help raise student achievement across the grades? Perhaps yes.

During my first four years on the San José City Council, I have been lobbied and visited by many who hope to influence the decisions that I make as a councilmember. There seems to be an endless line of special interests that form to ensure that I know their concerns. This is particularly so during budget negotiations when everyone thinks that the cuts are necessary, but that their project, program or need is the exception to the rule.

After much discussion at the City Council meeting last week the Council voted in favor of having city staff study performance as a criteria when it comes to employee layoffs. The review will determine if the City should include job performance when considering layoffs, or keep the current system in place, which is based solely on seniority.

I remember when a few civic leaders pushed to have the convention center in downtown San Jose named after former mayor Tom McEnery, even though he was still alive (and still is). Then came a train station that had to have the name of another still-living public figure, Rod Diridon. What came next? The San Jose International Airport’s name wasn’t good enough, so these same civic leaders (who like their own names on other buildings in surrounding communities) pushed to have our then quaint airport named after Norman Y. Mineta. Certainly a fine and honest man, and also very much alive.

Last week, San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed and former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown offered stark comments and opinions on the subject of runaway public employee compensation and pensions.  In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Reed suggested that the “seeds” of the problem were planted almost 30 years ago.

What is going down in Wisconsin with the teacher’s union is a Category 5 hurricane. In order for us to really “win the future” we must be smart and collaborative. We cannot declare war on public employee unions and think our future would be brighter. It will not.

In past blogs I have expressed my concern about the cost to our city of too much housing. Specifically, housing that does not pay its own share of revenue. One example I have pointed out—and constantly been the lone vote against—is affordable housing.

In what has become an annual refrain, we again sit at a crossroads of bad choices about cutting services and jobs, far worse even than last year. In June, we will slash many crucial services and lay off hundreds of city employees—as many as one out of every five—to resolve a budget deficit that will likely exceed $120 million. Demonizing our hard-working employees does not amount to much of an answer. After all, employees fairly bargained for these benefits.

The task remains for elected officials today to show renewed courage and fiscal sense. That requires a more difficult conversation, one about whether and how to cut retirement benefits that our current employees and retirees have long relied upon. While constitutional protections make it difficult, if not impossible, to do so through traditional mechanisms of collective bargaining, we need to work with our unions to find a new bargain with our employees: one which is both fair and sustainable.

With their city facing a $110 million budget deficit, more and more San Jose residents are weighing into the budget debate. In a recent letter to the Merc, San Jose resident Robert Lindley argued that San Jose residents should be “ashamed” for demanding that their public servants should “give up pay and retirement security so that those citizens will pay no more taxes.” Lindley goes on to say that “the city’s budget shortfall is the responsibility of all residents.” Really?

It was the threat of the Soviets leapfrogging us with their launch of Sputnik that spurred America to refocus on creating a generation of the best mathematicians and scientists. And Houston, we have a problem. The nation that put the first footprints on the moon in 1969 and built amazing vehicles that transport humans to orbit the earth—the Space Shuttle—is losing an important race in American education.

Sick leave payouts are part of the City of San Jose budget deficit problem. These payouts do not discriminate; every employee including management accrues sick leave, and if employed with the City long enough, will be eligible for sick leave payout when they retiree. One exception is that councilmembers do not accrue sick leave.

Last week, RDA director Harry Mavrogenes and the San Jose City Council said they would work to keep the Redevelopment Agency going despite Gov. Jerry Brown’s intention to shut down agencies statewide.

An article in the Mercury News closed with the following paragraph: “The governor’s finance office said Brown has not wavered on his position and cited a study released Tuesday by the state’s Legislative Analyst’s Office. The report offers support for Brown’s plan to eliminate the agencies and replace them with other ‘tools to finance economic development.’”

There appears to be a renewed interest in our county about the health and welfare of some of our most wounded children. My highest praise for the advocacy work being done by Judge Patrick Tondreau, presiding judge of the Juvenile Justice Court and Pam Serrano, Chair of the Juvenile Justice Commission. UPDATED Monday Feb. 21, 1:30pm.

The Budget Valentine will be visiting with the Council today at 1:30pm. The Council is having a public study session that will be streamed on the Internet and broadcast on Channel 26. This meeting will include discussion of what cuts will be required based on the budget shortfall.