After reading Mr. Zappa’s letter in the May 14issue of the
Dispatch, I felt it necessary to respond to allegations and
misinformation which appeared, and to set the record straight as to
how I and the rest of the City Council are attempting to work our
way through this difficult and unprecedented economic situation
which is not only affecting Gilroy, but the nation.
Mayor: Council trying to create a balance for use of our tax dollars
Dear Editor,
After reading Mr. Zappa’s letter in the May 14issue of the Dispatch, I felt it necessary to respond to allegations and misinformation which appeared, and to set the record straight as to how I and the rest of the City Council are attempting to work our way through this difficult and unprecedented economic situation which is not only affecting Gilroy, but the nation.
Allegations that I harbor any hostility towards our public safety unions are entirely incorrect. It might be noted that during the first round of budget cutbacks earlier this year, which unfortunately also included laying off 48 full-time employees, the public safety union membership was cut much less than the other employee unions. As a Council, we must look at the big picture. Our goal is to balance as best we can the results of cuts so that our community can maintain as much public safety, city service, and quality of life services as possible.
Mr. Zappa’s comments suggesting that we close the Sports Park and sell Gilroy Gardens, all for the purpose of foregoing any cuts to public safety unions would suggest to me that he wants Gilroy to be run as a police state, with little regard for quality of life services, facilities or activities. I also find it interesting that his repeated refrain “that binding arbitration was voted in by the people” also holds true to the fact that the mayor and Council were voted in by the people.
They must stand for re-election every four years. Why then, would it be unfair to put binding arbitration before a vote of the people – after 20 years?
With over 30 years as a business person, I and many of my fellow business colleagues in the private sector are also facing the same economy driven challenges that face organizations in the public sector. Layoffs have historically, and will continue to be, an important consideration when dealing with cost-cutting measures, since personnel costs are such a major component in most organizational structures.
On the one hand, many critics say that we should operate city government more like a business. In the private sector, layoffs, pay cuts and other union concessions are the rule, not the exception, as a means of dealing with economic realities. They also say that we should not spend more than we take in. The city of Gilroy is currently looking at an estimated revenue decrease of $8.1 million through the next fiscal year. Tough and often unpleasant decisions must be made to keep the city solvent.
I also find it interesting that many of the same people, who criticize the city’s purchase of Gilroy Gardens as a bad decision, are now saying that we should sell for a profit to put a Band-Aid on the current budget situation. Unfortunately, the city Council does not have the luxury of taking feel good steps in the short term, which in the end will have serious negative long-term consequences. It is very important to understand that the city owns the land and facilities at Gilroy Gardens; we do not own the theme park operation. The purchase of Gilroy Gardens was a strategic move, which may save the city over $40 million in cost avoidance in the future. The purchased property can be used for a west side corporation yard, recreation facilities and park space in the future.
As far as using rainy day funds (the city’s reserve fund) to get us out of this mess, it is important to realize that we have already dipped into this fund for four of the last six years.
I want to assure everyone in the community that this Council is working very hard to keep Gilroy safe and at the same time provide quality of life services that make Gilroy the type of community where people want to live and work. This must be based on what we can afford, and not at the expense of selling off assets for short-term gain. We have, and will continue, to look at and explore all options.
It is the duty of your elected officials to consider the “big picture” and take a long-term, strategic view when setting policies and investing the taxpayer’s hard-earned dollars. Scare tactics, emotionalism and the elevation of the value of one employee group over another is neither responsible nor constructive during these difficult economic times.
I continue to invite the community to call or meet with me any time, on any subject. My cell number is 408-483-3886.
Al Pinheiro, Mayor of Gilroy
‘Insulting when the governor threatens to sell San Quentin’
Dear Editor,
The governor tells us that dire things will happen if we don’t pass the propositions on the ballot. While I have the utmost respect for the governor I do NOT agree.
The state of California has been spending more money than it brings in for years. The legislature and the governor have done little or nothing to control costs for years. It is particularly insulting when the governor threatens to sell San Quentin.
No one believes that they are going to sell San Quentin but the flippant attitude prevails. No mention is made of renegotiating the unsustainable state retirement plans. No mention is made of reducing the number of bureaucrats. No mention is made of reducing the generous perks to elected and non-elected state officials.
Keith C. De Filippis, San Jose
