San José Taxpayers Save by Voting No on Measure B
by
MEF President Yolanda Cruz and CEO President LaVerne Washington
There are several important points relating to Measure B, which changes retirement benefits, that the April 21 Mercury News editorial ignored. In fact, San Jose city employees don't know who is their greatest adversary: Mayor Chuck Reed, who has disregarded every reasonable pension solution offered by employees, or the Mercury News, which has failed in its journalistic obligation to give San Jose citizens a balanced picture of what is happening to the municipal workforce that serves their interests.
Here is our view:
• The Mercury News editorial acknowledges that costly litigation is a likely outcome of voting "yes," what with the cost of placing Measure B on the ballot and the additional $6 million the mayor has set aside for outside legal fees to handle the litigation that will surely come. Conversely, voting no averts litigation, saves the $6 million, and will send a clear message to the City Council that you want them to negotiate, not litigate.
Remember that city workers are taxpayers, too. We have offered a range of solutions, only to have them ignored. If the measure passes, private attorneys hired by the city and union attorneys will be thrust into years of expensive legal wrangling as demonstrated by dozens of cases across the country.
• Pension changes under the Reed approach open the door to privatization of services, and this gets us to what may be the mayor's real long-term objective. Privatization of public utilities and services may reduce pension costs, but it is highly controversial, often proving to cost taxpayers more money in the long run with poorer results. Additionally, the private workers will likely be poorly paid, only furthering the demise of the middle class and widening the divide of the haves and have-nots.
• The effect on city services already is apparent in places like the Environmental Services Department, which is responsible for critical utilities. In the past six months, six top managers who together have decades of valuable experience have taken higher paying positions with Sunnyvale and other cities. Similarly, the crews that run San Jose's wastewater facility have dwindled to an alarming skeleton, where double shifts and overtime finally gave way to hiring outside help.
• You've been misled to think pensions are outrageously high. There is definitely room for changes to some elements of the retirement plan, but the majority of city employees are not highly paid police and firefighters; they are clerks, groundskeepers, facility operators, infrastructure maintenance workers, financial staff and program managers -- and their average pension is $37,000. These employees contribute to their pensions every year and do not receive Social Security.
San Jose's pension issue is complex, and voting yes on Measure B will have many negative and costly ramifications to you, the taxpayer. Voting no, on the other hand, doesn't stop pension modification but keeps it out of the courts and at the negotiating table where it belongs.
Save precious taxpayer dollars. Negotiate, don't litigate. Learn more about the issues, and we believe you'll agree that it makes financial sense to vote no on Measure B.
|