Guy Bjerke

State of the City - 2012

 Mayor Ron Leone painted a very realistic picture in his State of the City address today at a luncheon hosted by the Chamber of Commerce at the Concord Hilton.

He explained the hard truths - that state raids on local funding and the elimination of redevelopment will make balancing the city's budget and closing the structural deficit just that much harder.  He also pointed out how the now fewer, remaining city employees are being asked to do the same amount of work for less money and benefits.

The loss of redevelopment means funding for many events that draw shoppers to Concord - like the Farmer's Market and Music in Todos Santos Plaza will no longer be available.  Will the private sector step in to save these efforts?  Will other funding be found?  Will the City use General Fund dollars in the interim until a permanent funding source is identified?

On the positive side, Mayor Leone pointed out that the city is in a far better place, budget-wise, today than it was last year, or the year before, thanks to the revenue from Measure Q.  In fact, if I read one of his PowerPoint slides correctly, Measure Q transaction taxes represent about 11% of Concord's General Fund revenues.  And the recent audit shows the city's budget reserves have grown substantially in the past year after being nearly depleted as the city coped with the fall-out from the Great Recession.

The question will be should the city change the Measure Q strategy given the loss of redevelopment?  Measure Q was sold to the voters as a way to maintain current city services and rebuild reserves over the measure's five year life so that the structural budget deficit could be erased within the next ten years.  Can losing the programs previously funded by redevelopment be seen as anything but cutting - not maintaining city services?

Mayor Leone even raised the question of whether we should be thinking about possibly extending Measure Q when it expires in four years.  He didn't take a position on that idea - just brought it up for discussion purposes.

The city continues to face tough decisions this year and probably will for several years to come.  How to maintain essential city services, treat city employees fairly, keep faith with the taxpayers and rebuild budget reserves for the next downturn are on the City Council's agenda this Spring as they consider the next budget.  They need to know what Concord residents and business owners think - about the use of Measure Q dollars, about city service priorities and, perhaps most importantly, how soon the local economy will begin to resemble the Concord we all knew only five short years ago.

links for 2011-08-27

• Brubeck-Ivey House to be Formerly Dedicated Saturday - Concord, CA Patch
  A plaque installed earlier this year where his childhood home once stood, will be formerly dedicated in honor of living Jazz legend Dave Brubeck, Saturday morning. Make sure to show up at 1965 Colfax St. from 11 a.m. to 12 p.m. to participate the Concord Historical Society event.
  (tags: Concord)

Base Reuse process working well

An article last week in the Contra Costa Times - "Behind the scenes, developers influence Concord Naval Weapons Station planning" - leaves the impression that Council members and city staff are secretly meeting with developers to find ways to change the adopted Reuse Plan.

That's not happening.

First, while it is true that market-rate developers have not, so far, actively submitted formal comments during the Reuse Plan process they were in attendance at the various workshops and CAC meetings that were held.

As crazy as it seems - given that this process has been going on for over four years - it's still too early and too uncertain for most builders or developers to care about or spend resources on the Base Reuse project.

Further, I think it is smart the Council has asked staff to have the Base Reuse plan's economics re-examined and NOT getting the development community's expertise and advice in that process would be a huge mistake.

Second, the story doesn't explain that ALL the other groups - labor, affordable housing, social justice, education, environmental, neighborhood, sports, etc. have held numerous informal meetings, workshops and even rallies with Council members and city staff invitees in attendance over the past four years.  I know.  I attended many, if not most, of them.  

It's the Council and staff's responsibility to hear the viewpoints of the various stakeholders and make recommendations and decisions in the best interests of the entire community.

The Base Reuse process is far from over and everyone should continue to express their views and advocate for their cause.  So far I think the process is working well.  The fact not everyone is completely happy proves it.

The Future of the Concord Pavilion

I'm glad to see that the City has been able to negotiate a new management agreement for the Pavilion with Live Nation.  The City Council will consider the agreement at their meeting next Tuesday (March 22).  

It's unfortunate that the agreement is only for two years and that the changing realities of the music/concert business has yet again reduced what Live Nation is willing to pay the City for the management rights to the Pavilion.  Fortunately the City was able to refinance most of the outstanding Pavilion expansion bonds in 2009 and thereby lower the City's annual payments.  This agreement with Live Nation covers those payments and eliminates the need to use any General Fund dollars to subsidy the Pavilion over the next two years.  I think the Council should approve the agreement.

Then we wait.  We wait to see if the concert industry ever recovers.  We wait to see if the entertainment industry's business model will ever favor a Pavilion sized venue.

Or we act.  Long ago community activists, benefactors and music lovers started a Jazz Festival that grew and that effort resulted in the Concord Pavilion.  Can't we begin an equally challenging effort to restore community support and pride for our Pavilion?

I know times have changed and the professionals tell us it won't work.  But in 1996 many of those same professionals told us - incorrectly - that investing $19 million to expand the Pavilion would ensure its success.  They were wrong.  I think a new community effort, working collaboratively with Live Nation, may be the only chance we have to both protect our General Fund and enhance the long-term viability of the Concord Pavilion.

What do you think?

Concord's Measure Q - Starts on April 1

Concord's voter approved half-cent increase in the sales tax (Measure Q) goes into effect on April 1.

The Board of Equalization has sent this special notice to all businesses required to collect and file tax reports with them.  The notice lists all jurisdictions that will be changing their sales tax rate.

The increase in the sales tax will last five years and is expected to generate approximately $8 million dollars per year.  These funds will be used to protect core city services and replenish the city's budget reserves.  The additional revenue will not be used to restore city services or staff positions cut over the past two years as the city worked to balance its budget against declining revenues.

In approving the temporary sales tax increase (Measure Q) the voters also directed the City Council to appoint an Oversight Committee.  In January 2011 the Council decided the Oversight Committee should consist of seven members - 4 residents, 2 Concord business people (who may not live in Concord) and 1 who could be either a resident or business person.  The Council is expected to interview and appoint the initial Oversight Committee sometime in the next month.

I have applied to serve on the Oversight Committee because I would like to ensure the commitments the city made to Concord voters about the use and temporary nature of the additional sales tax are kept.

I know tax increases are unpopular.  The alternative - further cuts in city services after two years of program reductions, staff reductions and employee compensation concessions would also be unpopular.

The new sales tax revenue will give the city some flexibility as it struggles with yet another "take-away" by the state with the near certain elimination of redevelopment agencies in this year's state budget package.  I hope our legislators work with Governor Brown to create a new mechanism voters can approve to fund a new style of redevelopment and/or economic development efforts.

I appreciate the vision Concord voter's expressed when they passed Measure Q last November.  Now it will be important to see that the new revenue is used properly to stabilize city services and replenish our budget reserve - so that in five years we are prepared when this revenue source expires.

Why Don't More Women Apply for the Planning Commission?

It's been over 10 years since a woman has served on the Concord Planning Commission.

And yet only three of the 19 applicants the City Council will be considering for appointment to the Planning Commission next Tuesday night are women.  Why? [Link to staff report.]

The issues coming before the Planning Commission over the next two years are important and include both policy questions about the Base Reuse Project and the Citywide standards in the new Development Code.  On those two matters alone the Planning Commission recommendations to the City Council will help shape the future of Concord for decades.

Here's my advice to the Council:

1. Ignore those who tell you not to put possible opponents (future Council candidates) on the Planning Commission.  The Planning Commission is a training ground for future Council members.  Putting someone on the Planning Commission tests their abilities and gives them a small dose of the reality of serving in public office.  It is the best kind of succession planning.  And if ultimately the voters decide someone should serve on the City Council - I'd certainly prefer they have this experience.


2. Your staff is stretched thin.  Bringing new commissioners up to speed on the important, pending matters will take staff time and effort. While you are now filling 3 of the 5 Planning Commission seats, you have one "open" seat created by Ron Leone's election to Council last November. Think carefully before making more "change" than that. Now is not the time to discard the institutional knowledge and experience of Commissioners Bob Hoag and Kevin Costa.


3. Appoint a woman. 

Thirteen thousand votes NOT cast in Concord Council election

As I reviewed yesterday's election results from Concord I noticed a interesting fact. About 13,000 votes were not cast in the City Council election - that could have been cast.  According to the County Elections department there were 25,001 votes cast for and against Measure Q.

That should mean in a Council race for three seats (everyone has three votes) - that about 75,000 votes could be cast for City Council.  Yet look at the returns for Council...

Only 62,059 votes - or about 13,000 fewer than allowed/possible were actually cast.

Ironic.  More votes were not cast than the top vote-getter received.  Campaign strategy?  Voter forgetfulness or inattention?  Probably both and other reasons as well.  Still, what if...

P.S. - THANK YOU to Concord voters for passing Measure Q and providing funding protection for vital city services!

NOTE:  The tables shown in this post were not the final results - just what was available the morning after the election.

Halfway to Concord owes City an Apology

Measure Q on the November 2 ballot gives Concord residents a choice between a temporary increase in our local sales tax (1/2 cent) or further, substantial cuts in city services and programs.

I don't think more cuts in city services is in our communities' best interest.  I support Measure Q.

I do, however, understand that there is a small, vocal minority who oppose any and all tax increases - no matter how well justified - and who think cutting government spending will solve all our problems.  I don't agree, but I respect their right to their opinion and their right to express it.

What I do not respect is fringe, conspiracy theorists who see anyone or anything that does not agree with their point of view as criminal, illegal or worse.  These folks, let's call them wackadoodles, think a community education effort is brainwashing or think a public hearing is "fixed" if their side loses.  They cannot imagine that it might actually be in the "public interest" to tell residents - not how to vote - but what the consequences of the upcoming vote on Measure Q will mean for their city and lives.

That appears to be why Bill Gram-Reefer of the Halfway to Concord blog filed a complaint about the City's mailings with the Fair Political Practices Commission a couple of weeks ago.  He is upset that the City is informing residents about the importance of the upcoming vote on Measure Q and what is at stake.  The mailings never tell people how to vote; only how important the decision will be and encourages them to vote.

Well, the Fair Political Practices Commission has looked in to the complaint and summarily dismissed it.  Click on this to read the letter in pdf format.

"...it was determined that the mailers included with your complaint do not contain sufficient evidence to allege a violation of the Political Reform Act's prohibition against campaign related mailings being sent at public expense."

The City was copied on this letter yesterday.  Elections can be emotional times.  I don't seriously expect an apology.  But I do want Concord residents to know that the information the City has provided to you is both accurate and legal.    Please mail your ballot this weekend or show up at the polls on November 2.

Contra Costa Times Endorses Three Candidates that Support Measure Q

The Contra Costa Times, which earlier this month lumped their no on Measure Q opinion in a "no on everything" editorial assessing all the city sponsored measures, has endorsed three candidates for Concord City Council that support Measure Q.

The editorial supporting Laura Hoffmeister, Bob Hoag and Carlyn Obringer can be found here.

To be fair to the Times they had little ability to be consistent because most, if not all of the candidates support Measure Q.  The candidates understand the need for a temporary sales tax increase and the consequences to the City's budget and service levels should it fail.

Too bad the Contra Costa Times didn't bother to even consult with sitting Council members about the Measure prior to their misguided recommendation.  The editorial board would have seen that lumping all city revenue proposal together and making a blanket recommendation against them was unfair and short sighted.

City Manager on Pensions, Employee Contributions and New Hires

City Manager Dan Keen has responded to inquiries about pensions.  The Council negotiated new contracts with all employee bargaining units this summer.  Employee contributions toward pensions have increased and a new, less generous tier of benefits is being established for new hires.

Here's his email to all City Council candidates and the City Council:

The City has two retirement programs, one for sworn personnel (referred to as Safety), and one for all other staff (referred to as Miscellanous).  Both programs are a part of the Public Employee Retirement System, commonly referred to as PERS.

The basic formula for retirement benefits in Concord is as follows:  For Safety employees, an employee retiring after reaching age 50 and having at least 5 years of service will receive a pension which is based upon their years of service times 3%.    So, for example, a 25-year public safety employee who is age 50 at retirement would receive a pension based upon 75% of their highest 12-month salary.  This formula is commonly referred to as "3% at 50".

For Miscellaneous employees, an employee must be at least 55 years of age at retirement, and have at least 5 years of service to receive a pension which is based upon their years of service times 2.5%.  So, for example, a 25-year miscellanous employee who is age 55 at retirement would receive a pension based upon 62.5% of their highest 12-month salary.  This formula is commonly referred to as "2.5% at 55".

On tonight's Council agenda, the City Council will consider a change to the program for Miscellaneous employees.  If approved, this change would apply to all newly hired Miscellanous employees, and would change the formula to "2% at 55".  Thus, a 25-year Miscellaneous employee age 55 at retirement would receive a pension based on 50% of their highest 12-month salary.  The formulas in place for Safety and Miscellaneous employees are contractual obligations of the City, and for all practical purposes, can not be changed by action of the City Council with respect to existing employees hired while those formulas were in place.  However, through the labor negotiation process, the formulas for new employees can be changed, and that is why this item is on the agenda tonight.

The City pays for the costs of these retirement programs throughout the year.  The pension costs are divided into an "employee share", and an "employer share".  

For the Safety program, the employee share is 9%, and for the Miscellaneous program, the employee share is 8%.  However, until recently, all of the employee share for both programs was "picked up" by the City, a result of negotiated contracts during better times.  With the approval of new labor contracts last July, employees will be paying a greater share of the "employee share" -- for Safety employees, 2.5% beginning July 1, 2010, and 5% on January 1, 2011; for Miscellaneous employees, 2% on July 1, 2010, and 5% on July 1, 2011.  The remaining share of the "employee share" will continue to be borne by the City (as of July 1, 2011, 4% for Safety employees, and 3% for Miscellaneous employees).

The employer share for both the Safety program and the Miscellaneous program is determined annually by PERS, based upon an actuarial study that is prepared by PERS.  This study examines a variety of factors to come up with an appropriate employer rate to fully fund the obligations of the City's retirement programs, including changes to the age and composition of our workforce, salary changes, the performance of PERS' investment portfolio, and broad assumptions about employee lifespan following retirement.  

In the current fiscal year, the employer rates are 25.855% for Safety, and 16.278% for Miscellaneous employees.   When the City's share of the "employee share" is included, the effective rates are 32.36% (as of July 1, 2010) and 29.86% (as of January 1, 2011) for Safety employees, and 22.28% (as of July 1, 2010) and 19.28% (as of July 1, 2011) for Miscellaneous employees.  The total cost to the City for pension benefits in Fiscal Year 2010-11 is $8.3 million, of which $7.3 million is General Fund.  This represents 10.2% of our expected revenue for this budget year.

In future years, we expect the employer rates to increase markedly, due to the massive investment losses which PERS incurred in 2008 and 2009, as well as changes to assumptions about retiree longevity (i.e., retirees are expected to live longer).  The current 10-year budget plan includes assumptions about future PERS rates which account for these expected increases.

There is a tremendous amount of additional information that could be provided about PERS, and I have only attempted to provide the basics with respect to Concord's programs.  Additional information can be found at http://www.calpers.ca.gov/. 

Dan Keen
City Manager