An explanation of how the ballot initiative process has affected the local political landscape—including a breakdown of four initiatives created in the last year—and an update on the $1 million check submitted by a developer to the city last week.

A new phone poll in San Jose wants to know exactly how you feel about card rooms. More specifically, the poll, paid for by Bay 101, wants to know how receptive you are to the city’s two casinos increasing card tables to 98 apiece and potentially incorporating Indian casinos’ modern-day 40 acres and a mule: slot machines.

I predict going forward that groups sponsoring ballot initiatives will be a constant part of the political landscape in San Jose, similar to the outside funding of planning department ordinances by third parties to move forward on regulations. The minimum wage initiative recently gathered and submitted the required signatures last week, and action will be taken at the May 22 City Council meeting. A library initiative is also in the process of gathering signatures for a November election.

The “victory” claimed by certain union members by suing the city over the word “reform”—as in “pension reform,” known as Measure B for the June ballot measure—may have actually jeopardized a future tax increase to fund their own jobs. The removal of the wording, “essential city services including neighborhood police patrols, fire stations, libraries, community centers, streets and parks,” was included in the ruling and cannot be used as a way for the city to lure residents into supporting higher taxation.

Santa Clara County’s Democratic Central Committee held a meeting Thursday to sign off on its endorsements for this June’s election, and things got weird. Factions formed when it came time voice support for candidates in each district of the San Jose City Council, and the choices showed a surprising split in the house of labor.

The spillover from Milpitas’ toxic political landscape has finally seeped over to San Jose. On Tuesday, Milpitas councilmember Debbie Giordano requested the city’s attorney investigate council colleague Armando Gomez’s fundraising activities for San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed. The direction by Giordano seems to be a direct response to Gomez—a senior budget advisor to Reed—targeting a lobbying loophole that he says Giordano and political consultant Vic Ajlouny have taken advantage of.

It appears Ballot Measure B is ready to go to voters. Superior Court judges granted small victories to both the city of San Jose and labor when clarifying what language should be used.

UPDATE: The California Superior Court set a hearing for Monday, April 2, to rule on competing lawsuits regarding Measure B.—Editor

Councilmember Pete Constant and Ballot Measure B’s campaign treasurer, Ben Roth, plan to file their own complaint in California Superior Court on Friday morning. Their petition claims opponents of the pension and benefits reform ballot measure used false and misleading statements in their arguments. The filing comes almost a week after labor unions filed their own lawsuit over ballot language. A judge could rule on both the unions’ lawsuit and the more recent petition ahead of the scheduled April 3 hearing.

A judge ruled in favor of attorneys representing city workers Monday to hold an expedited hearing on April 3 about the language of Measure B, the pension and benefits reform ballot measure. The ruling comes on the heels of a lawsuit filed Friday in California Superior Court that claims the ballot question violates the Election Code because it does not contain impartial and non-argumentative language, as the law requires.

A citizens signature drive is underway to secure a certain percentage of the budget for our libraries. This would replace the library parcel tax set to expire in 2014. If enough signatures are collected, the measure could be placed on the ballot in November. Last month, I proposed examining and collecting data for setting a certain percentage of the budget—higher than today’s percentage—for the police department. Perhaps we could combine the ideas and set a percentage of the budget for police and libraries.

Mayor Chuck Reed called an audit requested by local state legislators “politically motivated.” He is correct. But calling a fake “fiscal emergency,” exaggerating the size of the problem and calling on voters to pass a pension reform ballot measure that most attorneys, including myself, believe won’t stand a court challenge is also “politically motivated.”

I had some calls last week on the topic of pensions and the June ballot measure. Several people were under the impression that San Jose will eliminate pensions altogether, which is not the case. Other callers wanted to replace the current system with a 401K-type benefit. I think there are other options to pension reform that would save San Jose money. For one thing, we should eliminate spending on all items not in the City Charter.

Last week, the council discussed a poll of residents/likely voters regarding their views about tax increases. The majority of the Council appears to be considering a June ballot measure for a tax increase. Since the poll respondents are anonymous and nearly everyone on this blog is anonymous, I thought I would ask the question: Which tax do you want? How much of it?

Let the real battle begin. On Tuesday, the City Council voted 6-5 to place a retirement reform ballot measure before voters in June 2012, which will also be the same time California voters take part in the presidential primary election. Supporting the ballot measure were Mayor Chuck Reed and councilmembers Madison Nguyen, Pete Constant, Rose Herrera, Sam Liccardo and Pierluigi Oliverio. Voting against the measure were councilmembers Xavier Campos, Kansen Chu, Ash Kalra, Nancy Pyle and Don Rocha.

It is clear that the budget deficit this year and in future years cannot be solved only by pension reform. Even if the city stopped matching the employee contributions at the current rate of 250 percent to the average employer match on a 401K of 3-6 percent, taxpayers would still have a multi-billion dollar unfunded liability from commitments to current and future retirees already vested. Why beat around the bush when we know taxes will have to be raised to afford the pension obligations and maintain bare minimum services laid out in the city charter?

Councilmember Sam Liccardo has drafted a memo to explore a ballot measure that would increase local sales taxes to specifically fund public safety.