[GPSCC-chat] Proposed increase in San José Police budget failed

Wed Mar 5 14:20:31 PST 2014

Hello, All:

       Councilmember Oliverio's proposal to increase police from 30 to 
40 percent of the general revenue was voted down 10 to 1 by the San José 
City Council yesterday.  "[C]ritics including the police union had 
written off the Willow Glen councilman's plan as a political stunt. City 
budget officials said they would have to cut all other departments by 
about 30 percent to make the new spending plan work." 
(http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_25275593/san-jose-police-wont-get-minimum-funding-after) 

       Thanks to any who attended and spoke against the measure or wrote 
their councilmembers.

       Best Wishes,
       Spencer

################

       Please come to the City Council meeting Tuesday, 2 PM, if you 
can.  Councilmember Oliverio wants the City Council to vote then to 
increase the San José Police budget from 30 to 40 percent of the general 
revenue;  see below.

       I think this is a serious mistake, possibly leading to an 
increase rather than a decrease in crime.

       The incarceration rate in the US today is 5 times what it was 40 
years ago.  No change in crime correlates with that.  I know of only one 
change during these past 40 years that can explain that: Consolidation 
of ownership of the mainstream commercial media with a massive reduction 
in investigative journalism.  The air time left open by this reduction 
in investigative journalism was filled by increasing coverage of violent 
crime.   This fear mongering convinced the public to support stiffer 
prison sentences.

       We need evidence-based public policy, not fearmongering.  In 
particular, we need to better understand what programs keep kids in 
school and out of prison and what prison and release programs minimize 
recidivism.

       One example was the one-year Perry Preschool program in 1962 that 
became the prototype for Head Start.  By age 40, only 28% of the Perry 
Preschool kids had served time in jail or prison vs. 52% of the matched 
control group.

       This was only a 1-year intervention.  With more serious 
interventions, I believe we can virtually eliminate the school drop out 
problem and with it the violent crime that justifies law enforcement.

       However, to do this, we need more flexibility in how the general 
revenue is spent.

       Thanks,
       Spencer Graves

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Police Budget Security
Date: 	Sun, 2 Mar 2014 20:36:21 -0500 (EST)
From: 	Councilmember Pierluigi Oliverio <pierluigi.oliverio at sanjoseca.gov>
Reply-To: 	pierluigi.oliverio at sanjoseca.gov
To: 	spencer.graves at effectivedefense.org

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here 
<http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?ca=1dbd4eea-bb27-43f6-9ca4-489adb282e6e&c=06ccc5d0-51c4-11e3-aea3-d4ae5275509e&ch=08e82bc0-51c4-11e3-aed8-d4ae5275509e> 

Dear Spencer,

The City Council will vote Tuesday afternoon at approximately 2PM on my 
referendum to increase the police budget. This would allow San Jose 
residents to vote on locking in funding for police as the top priority, 
regardless of the elected officials in office at any given time. The 
June 2014 Police Budget Security ballot initiative would allocate 40% of 
the general fund to our police department (currently the rate is 30%). 
If such a secure allocation had been in the city charter, San Jose would 
have never laid off 66 police officers in 2011.

For the purposes described herein, the "police department budget" would 
encompass all salary compensation, benefit compensation, sick leave, 
comp time, vacation payouts and workers compensation for sworn and 
non-sworn employees of the police department. It should also be 
understood to include all necessary police equipment, new technology 
(hardware & software), police dispatchers with essential communications 
equipment, annual utility and maintenance costs of police facilities, 
and the required personnel from HR, Legal and IT.

In light of the Feb 10, 2014 city council study session, it is apparent 
that a majority of the city council wants to move ahead with a tax 
increase that is not restricted in nature, and could therefore be spent 
on anything. No wishlist, statement of intent, or ordinance passed by 
the city council is legally binding in terms of how new tax revenue 
dollars can be spent. In fact, spending priorities could be changed any 
given Tuesday by six votes. The ONLY way to legally lock in future and 
existing tax revenues for the police department is to allow San Jose 
voters to amend the city charter.

As you may recall I first floated this idea over two years ago in the 
following articles I wrote:

http://sjdistrict6.com/change-the-charter-for-police-budget/ 
<http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001uMqeqpXESyNv53WWDyt9zCSQHbwGouT_TXKGSCKcCswI1Nw7sKYyqrstgKOOhy2piK_PXfY65Wdr_qvraDa6Zb1LUBRMeHG7SfDUjmEuQ_nhlLqnYhB6t-dd-GEe-Cs7HJiHiKO7yiN6VUEEh45n3QV6uJ6GSSjaNVrGZJCniXPCN1pbgbT_RKyvTmFHyPb5P1WiXncDdy2Di3yzCABIIl30301vMo1uAEk3CoH4k8v_WITAoU4tWNQYyRNqK0chkOtyzsC2XJZBArensp6eg1WIb1fFN8H7cARYG30VBs9sFX7DONf9Hg5SkLUr-5QLgjW8claHzDkwndUF747qMw==&c=fFtt98Hrz_9EUz9IaHJBF3SATEzx2AlvAOA6jysllq6xFy-BcKZrvw==&ch=0R5fwH8BaPg8nhz1evA62FzkADyX5VNG8jo-Njei4lvbIllNYFcUyg==>

http://sjdistrict6.com/police-budget-we-get-you-get/ 
<http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001uMqeqpXESyNv53WWDyt9zCSQHbwGouT_TXKGSCKcCswI1Nw7sKYyqrstgKOOhy2pW_LwvoNiZOUpxkT7oKTdclknRdG_KWp5Wg3595jtE1MDn3XhzHHDBugPT4jYTYBh5cuLIYhJcGFgXS6pj52aP90U1Onp4nTJxDBsJ-aGQBHLNx2zL6l2h4Z_e6FY9XzGQY0sqDRlbZtDkQUtpT4XCXMRkMsL4vKXcFFEhmQl-WWv_ozHuiNsVOxtKb0RDzOPcCWx0M7reslP7UqBr4AkxWPJ9dKU3bpgNMuWg4NE9ZcSBPbGooCmRqz9LR9hjuexleJILL1Ny5s=&c=fFtt98Hrz_9EUz9IaHJBF3SATEzx2AlvAOA6jysllq6xFy-BcKZrvw==&ch=0R5fwH8BaPg8nhz1evA62FzkADyX5VNG8jo-Njei4lvbIllNYFcUyg==>

If it is the intention of the city council to push a new $60 million a 
year tax measure in November, then I feel we should first put this 
charter amendment on the ballot in June. Passage would allow voters to 
rest assured that a portion of new tax revenues will be earmarked and 
specifically reserved for police expenditures. This would allow the 
Police Chief to do his job and allow for greater control over how money 
is allocated and spent within the police department.

By way of background, even the most casual observer would agree that 
there is an unlimited demand for police services.  From stopping the 
most egregious violent crime to issuing traffic citations, the essential 
nature of the work of our law enforcement team is beyond debate. If we 
as citizens properly value the ability to walk down the street knowing 
that a would-be criminals' fear of police would stop an assault on an 
innocent person, then we should all agree that it is vitally important 
to prioritize their ongoing fiscal security.

This charter amendment would be the ONLY legal way to guarantee that 
police would always be the top budget priority. With a budget increase, 
opportunities would arise to put more police officers on the street, 
raise salaries, and make technology purchases that would lead to greater 
operational efficiency.  Currently, a higher concentration of police 
officers are deployed in the Downtown and East side districts, thus 
leaving other areas to suffer from increased property crimes and quality 
of life issues. My proposal would solve that. A larger, better 
compensated police force would lead to more organizational flexibility, 
improved officer safety, and better overall coverage to ALL areas of San 
Jose, including your District 6 neighborhood.

Allowing residents to prioritize the city budget for police is not only 
legally sound and democratic, it is also the right thing to do to secure 
our city's future, retain property values and enable economic growth. I 
believe you deserve the right to vote.

As always, please feel free to contact me regarding any concerns or 
ideas you have regarding your neighborhood and the City of San Jose overall.
Regards,
signature

Councilmember Pierluigi Oliverio

District 6
City of San José
408-535-4906
Pierluigi.Oliverio at SanJoseCA.gov <mailto:Pierluigi.Oliverio at sanjoseca.gov>
www.SJDistrict6.com 
<http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001uMqeqpXESyNv53WWDyt9zCSQHbwGouT_TXKGSCKcCswI1Nw7sKYyqrstgKOOhy2pOtSKSQLV1sZWxkPPvn1V29slL7OyydE9j53CZdphmxdeEY-lPVLoC0rTtxk5irvDFszhaWHmk-3HyNPzRgEZSGfzZaUFq0ME_Dv8au3EOmIZUN6vRFew2UMjG2YwymxFZyEHgbRJHT1Y8ZaegGEsAET4ardgUwD1wRGUKv8Odea1QV_gPFxUPVt9HA1DN8ihBlrPZUaPKqV89PcHZfsbjuiOqYA0pS-nUmH0rYRIkYU=&c=fFtt98Hrz_9EUz9IaHJBF3SATEzx2AlvAOA6jysllq6xFy-BcKZrvw==&ch=0R5fwH8BaPg8nhz1evA62FzkADyX5VNG8jo-Njei4lvbIllNYFcUyg==> (Includes 
over 300 articles I have written about San Jose)

Follow me on Facebook for more updates.

Like us on Facebook 
<http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001uMqeqpXESyNv53WWDyt9zCSQHbwGouT_TXKGSCKcCswI1Nw7sKYyqtgKNlwPmNQx_IOBrqljijt_dUmOIQ-zhMk6puHcg3kDMvee-0L0crw29RmGn_w34fA7BVHPhBqmOnJqnFwbGg0jwdOKp_dGGZ4sHyYWHFQNrgCHBKnobt4SlkUFCmV4rFL_anjgmJXZzPIOWzS7Vpg7Y3jn-nkmw1YLDmnmH-N4Q0J74nwpzcbOUquytmxoTg==&c=fFtt98Hrz_9EUz9IaHJBF3SATEzx2AlvAOA6jysllq6xFy-BcKZrvw==&ch=0R5fwH8BaPg8nhz1evA62FzkADyX5VNG8jo-Njei4lvbIllNYFcUyg==> 

Forward email 
<http://ui.constantcontact.com/sa/fwtf.jsp?llr=iz8nzydab&m=1103564828456&ea=spencer.graves%40effectivedefense.org&a=1116698980349>
<http://visitor.constantcontact.com/do?p=un&m=001Fqg8j9PVFukNND0XqvTMqg%3D%3D&ch=08e82bc0-51c4-11e3-aed8-d4ae5275509e&ca=1dbd4eea-bb27-43f6-9ca4-489adb282e6e> 
	<http://www.constantcontact.com/index.jsp?cc=TEM_BusLet_003>

This email was sent to spencer.graves at effectivedefense.org by 
pierluigi.oliverio at sanjoseca.gov 
<mailto:pierluigi.oliverio at sanjoseca.gov> |
Update Profile/Email Address 
<http://visitor.constantcontact.com/do?p=oo&m=001Fqg8j9PVFukNND0XqvTMqg%3D%3D&ch=08e82bc0-51c4-11e3-aed8-d4ae5275509e&ca=1dbd4eea-bb27-43f6-9ca4-489adb282e6e> 
| Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe 
<http://visitor.constantcontact.com/do?p=un&m=001Fqg8j9PVFukNND0XqvTMqg%3D%3D&ch=08e82bc0-51c4-11e3-aed8-d4ae5275509e&ca=1dbd4eea-bb27-43f6-9ca4-489adb282e6e>^(TM) 
| Privacy Policy <http://ui.constantcontact.com/roving/CCPrivacyPolicy.jsp>.

City of San Jose| 200 East Santa Clara St| San Jose| CA| 95113

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20140305/1229426d/attachment.html>