Here are some comments sent in by readers over the past few days:
+ Enough about the pension mess. It's old news...and too complicated, anyway
+ The people in charge are crooks…the details don't matter
+ Don't go blaming city workers for what got decided at the top
+ Please, no more explanations...just tell us what to do!
Common Denominator: Utter Frustration
This could be a slippery slope. If the public perceives local government as a toxic mix of political jello, spineless leadership, and sheer doubletalk, why bother participating in the process? If it looks like the sky really is falling, why waste energy on learning the facts? If the public holds no one accountable because no one remembers who did what, who ends up controlling the future? From a good government perspective, it's very frustrating.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Business as Usual
San Diego is a very "business as usual" kind of town. Something in our genetic code seems to ward off mutation. The problem is, while mutation is seen as undesirable when it results in a virulent flu strain, resistance to change -- at least for cities -- ultimately breeds stagnation and decline.
Not to say we haven't seen anything new in town. For the past few years we've been experimenting with an executive mayor rather than an appointed city manager to run the city. Also, there has been a shift in the balance between Democrat and Republican officeholders. And notwithstanding our reputation as a socially conservative city, voters recently elected openly gay male council members. And let's not overlook the increasing presence of labor unions at the decision-making table.
Still, genetics and/or ingrained traditions are tough adversaries. Despite some fresh faces adorning city hall we remain a company town, held in close check by a handful of business interests who maintain control over the people who control the city's fate.
Finger in the Dike
Think about this: the city's Independent Budget Analyst has stated that the mayor's Five-Year Financial Outlook for 2010-2014 "presents a sobering view of the City's financial situation, projecting significant General Fund deficits in each of the next five years." What does this mean in concrete terms? At this very moment, city officials are trying to fill a $60 million deficit in the upcoming city budget with across-the-board fee increases, cuts in city wages, curtailed city services, sale of public property, etc. So far so good for the current budget shortfall.
But what happens next year when the budget deficit is projected to climb to $100 million? Pockets will have to get picked a little deeper the next time around. More drastic job cuts? Trash fees? New bond borrowing for day-to-day maintenance that the city can no longer deliver? Water and sewer rate hikes? Property transfer taxes? A utility tax? Will that do the trick?
Maybe, at least for that fiscal year. But what about the next? Sell off Balboa Park? And the next, and the next? Each year, the public will pay more and get less, yet it will barely make a dent. We'll still be sinking because the city's debt obligations are compounding faster than all these massive budget cuts and ingenious schemes for new revenues can keep up with.
Who Should Decide the City's Fate
Many scandalous decisions have been made in this town, but perhaps the most egregious one is that top officials are choosing to keep the public in the dark about the most serious fiscal crisis the city has ever faced. Don't we have a right to know what the consequences will be: the staggering cumulative costs to taxpayers, the toll it will take on our communities, and the inexorable shift of city resources out of the public and into the private realm?
Here's where our genetics kicks in. Rather than change course, rather than call for an emergency, comprehensive, aggressive approach to deal with the destructive decisions made in the past, those in charge would prefer to take care of business by nickel-and-diming the public ad infinitum or until they are safely out of office, whichever comes first.
It's Called Business as Usual, San Diego-Style
Hiding the truth is not compatible with responsible and accountable government. We need to start lighting some fires under our leadership. We need an economic summit and we need it now.
Not to say we haven't seen anything new in town. For the past few years we've been experimenting with an executive mayor rather than an appointed city manager to run the city. Also, there has been a shift in the balance between Democrat and Republican officeholders. And notwithstanding our reputation as a socially conservative city, voters recently elected openly gay male council members. And let's not overlook the increasing presence of labor unions at the decision-making table.
Still, genetics and/or ingrained traditions are tough adversaries. Despite some fresh faces adorning city hall we remain a company town, held in close check by a handful of business interests who maintain control over the people who control the city's fate.
Finger in the Dike
Think about this: the city's Independent Budget Analyst has stated that the mayor's Five-Year Financial Outlook for 2010-2014 "presents a sobering view of the City's financial situation, projecting significant General Fund deficits in each of the next five years." What does this mean in concrete terms? At this very moment, city officials are trying to fill a $60 million deficit in the upcoming city budget with across-the-board fee increases, cuts in city wages, curtailed city services, sale of public property, etc. So far so good for the current budget shortfall.
But what happens next year when the budget deficit is projected to climb to $100 million? Pockets will have to get picked a little deeper the next time around. More drastic job cuts? Trash fees? New bond borrowing for day-to-day maintenance that the city can no longer deliver? Water and sewer rate hikes? Property transfer taxes? A utility tax? Will that do the trick?
Maybe, at least for that fiscal year. But what about the next? Sell off Balboa Park? And the next, and the next? Each year, the public will pay more and get less, yet it will barely make a dent. We'll still be sinking because the city's debt obligations are compounding faster than all these massive budget cuts and ingenious schemes for new revenues can keep up with.
Who Should Decide the City's Fate
Many scandalous decisions have been made in this town, but perhaps the most egregious one is that top officials are choosing to keep the public in the dark about the most serious fiscal crisis the city has ever faced. Don't we have a right to know what the consequences will be: the staggering cumulative costs to taxpayers, the toll it will take on our communities, and the inexorable shift of city resources out of the public and into the private realm?
Here's where our genetics kicks in. Rather than change course, rather than call for an emergency, comprehensive, aggressive approach to deal with the destructive decisions made in the past, those in charge would prefer to take care of business by nickel-and-diming the public ad infinitum or until they are safely out of office, whichever comes first.
It's Called Business as Usual, San Diego-Style
Hiding the truth is not compatible with responsible and accountable government. We need to start lighting some fires under our leadership. We need an economic summit and we need it now.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
The City of San Diego is Under a Double Whammy
Like most other US cities, San Diego has been hit hard by the national economic meltdown. We've got ebbing sales taxes, record-high unemployment, mounting foreclosures, and tanking revenues from our mainstay tourism industry. Our mayor has put the squeeze on municipal labor unions and tapped into mysterious slush funds to backfill an enormous $60 million gap in our municipal bank account so the city can continue to pay its bills.
It's Not Just the National Recession
If San Diego's dire straits were simply a reflection of the national recession, we'd count ourselves lucky. But there's a more potent threat hanging over us that could singlehandedly decimate our city. A decade ago, city officials entered into an agreement with municipal union leaders to underfund the municipal pension system while simultaneously amping up pension benefits. With a wink and a handshake the city's future was put up as collateral. It's been a losing proposition for the public ever since.
When Mayor Sanders took office in 2005 there was a $19 million budget shortfall, prompting him to say, "Our city's mired in a financial crisis of historic proportions." Four years later our budget shortfall has mushroomed to $60 million, dwarfing all previous "historic proportions." And it's not over. According to reputable forecasts, today's budget deficit will look like chicken feed compared to next year's shortfall…and the next…and next.
Why? Because each year, a growing percentage of our city budget is earmarked for expanding pension-related debt and expenses, leaving an ever-shrinking pot of money to pay for ordinary city services. Even a miraculous recovery in the world economy won't change the fact that San Diego's chances of emerging whole from our self-inflicted pension morass appear dim.
The Public Can't Afford to be Passive
We need to change course and start keeping closer tabs on how the "people in charge" are proposing to fix our financial problems. Keep in mind that the "people in charge" were responsible for the ill-advised, destructive decisions that could cripple our city for many decades to come. Business as usual, either by the public or our city officials, is no longer a rational or viable option in San Diego.
It's Not Just the National Recession
If San Diego's dire straits were simply a reflection of the national recession, we'd count ourselves lucky. But there's a more potent threat hanging over us that could singlehandedly decimate our city. A decade ago, city officials entered into an agreement with municipal union leaders to underfund the municipal pension system while simultaneously amping up pension benefits. With a wink and a handshake the city's future was put up as collateral. It's been a losing proposition for the public ever since.
When Mayor Sanders took office in 2005 there was a $19 million budget shortfall, prompting him to say, "Our city's mired in a financial crisis of historic proportions." Four years later our budget shortfall has mushroomed to $60 million, dwarfing all previous "historic proportions." And it's not over. According to reputable forecasts, today's budget deficit will look like chicken feed compared to next year's shortfall…and the next…and next.
Why? Because each year, a growing percentage of our city budget is earmarked for expanding pension-related debt and expenses, leaving an ever-shrinking pot of money to pay for ordinary city services. Even a miraculous recovery in the world economy won't change the fact that San Diego's chances of emerging whole from our self-inflicted pension morass appear dim.
The Public Can't Afford to be Passive
We need to change course and start keeping closer tabs on how the "people in charge" are proposing to fix our financial problems. Keep in mind that the "people in charge" were responsible for the ill-advised, destructive decisions that could cripple our city for many decades to come. Business as usual, either by the public or our city officials, is no longer a rational or viable option in San Diego.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Does the City of San Diego Measure Up?
With the aim of improving our system of government and impacting public policies through citizen education and advocacy, the League of Women Voters of San Diego will be providing League members and the greater San Diego community with a running commentary called the Good Government Checklist. It will deal with public policy decisions and official actions that are shaping San Diego's future.
The objective of these commentaries is twofold: a) to advance the League's principles and positions, and b) to prepare for the upcoming public debate and ballot measure on whether to retain, modify, or repeal our five-year experiment with a strong mayor form of government, due to expire at the end of next year.
The LWV is well suited for this task, given our non-partisan commitment to providing voter information as well as positive civic change across three broad categories:
a) Open, accountable, representative, and responsive government
b) Environmental protection and natural resource management in the public interest
c) Social and economic justice, health and safety, and equal rights and opportunity for all
The guiding question for our Good Government Checklist will be: How well does the city of San Diego measure up to the principles and positions of the LWV?
WE INVITE YOU TO STAY TUNED!
The objective of these commentaries is twofold: a) to advance the League's principles and positions, and b) to prepare for the upcoming public debate and ballot measure on whether to retain, modify, or repeal our five-year experiment with a strong mayor form of government, due to expire at the end of next year.
The LWV is well suited for this task, given our non-partisan commitment to providing voter information as well as positive civic change across three broad categories:
a) Open, accountable, representative, and responsive government
b) Environmental protection and natural resource management in the public interest
c) Social and economic justice, health and safety, and equal rights and opportunity for all
The guiding question for our Good Government Checklist will be: How well does the city of San Diego measure up to the principles and positions of the LWV?
WE INVITE YOU TO STAY TUNED!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)